The Liberal Gun Club Forum

one of the things that really chaps my ass with the healthcare debate is to have to listen to conservatives constantly whine about it. like it or not, we are obligated to pay taxes to fund the everyday things we take for granted.

the irony for me is that none of them think twice about the excise tax they pay everytime they buy firearms or hunting/fishing licenses that go towards wildlife management/preservation. I like to think of the healthcare mandate as human-life management/preservation. i've also seen users on other gun forums pose the question, "are you an American citizen first, or a citizen of your state?" surprisingly, a lot of them said they were citizens of their state first and saw no problem with seceding from the Union. good luck with that, traitors.

*rant over*

Carl_Spackler wrote:one of the things that really chaps my ass with the healthcare debate is to have to listen to conservatives constantly whine about it. like it or not, we are obligated to pay taxes to fund the everyday things we take for granted.

the irony for me is that none of them think twice about the excise tax they pay everytime they buy firearms or hunting/fishing licenses that go towards wildlife management/preservation. I like to think of the healthcare mandate as human-life management/preservation. i've also seen users on other gun forums pose the question, "are you an American citizen first, or a citizen of your state?" surprisingly, a lot of them said they were citizens of their state first and saw no problem with seceding from the Union. good luck with that, traitors.

*rant over*

I love it when they try to get away with varied schemes from paying any kind of taxes, as if they were entitled to public services/infrastructures/military/police/water treatment/fire rescue...etc. for free.

Xela

I reside in a state but an a Citizen of the USA.

MO has already nixed the idea of an insurance exchange handled by the state, guess we get the Federal version instead. Fricken BRILLIANT.

Carl_Spackler wrote:one of the things that really chaps my ass with the healthcare debate is to have to listen to conservatives constantly whine about it. like it or not, we are obligated to pay taxes to fund the everyday things we take for granted.

the irony for me is that none of them think twice about the excise tax they pay everytime they buy firearms or hunting/fishing licenses that go towards wildlife management/preservation. I like to think of the healthcare mandate as human-life management/preservation. i've also seen users on other gun forums pose the question, "are you an American citizen first, or a citizen of your state?" surprisingly, a lot of them said they were citizens of their state first and saw no problem with seceding from the Union. good luck with that, traitors.

*rant over*

This right here seems to be one of two core elements that differentiate us from the conservatives.

The first being that they see the United States more like the European union, where each state is a sovereign state rather than a territory of the UNITED States. Therefor they think of anything from the federal government outside basic national defense as directly imposing on the sovereignty of their State.

The other thing I have noticed is quite possibly the scariest thing about conservatives. They hammer home that we are not a democracy, that we are a republic. To them the worst amendment contrary to popular belief is not 13th amendment (though I imagine some still hold it as such), but the 17th amendment. Prior to the 17th amendment senators were elected by state legislators, not the people. When you actually start asking them hard questions they show a hatred of democracy, claiming that people vote themselves undeserved rewards, and that the state legislators should choose who is best for us and we should remain good obedient little dogs.

One of the things I like to ask my conservative colleagues is to tell me what their net federal income tax is. Not their top marginal rate, just the simple ratio of federal tax to gross income. Neglect social security for now - it is a good deal and, contrary to the hype, it is not in danger of disappearance. Also forget state and local taxes since they vary so much. Almost no one can answer the question and, if they do, they invariably overestimate their net rate.

I will not quote my household income but it is in the top 5% My net tax rate is under 20%. For that investment, I can drink the water and eat the food most anywhere in the country, drive on paved roads, be reasonably secure that I will not be raped by roving hoards of brigands. I have a stable currency with minimal fluctuation, breathe clean air, visit beautiful national parks, travel safely by air and land, etc. I contend that I get a pretty good deal. Not perfect, but darned good value for the overall price. (no, I do not get free medical care)

Preaching to the choir? Probably.

I know I sound like a broken record but there isn't enough known about the details to get excited or even make an educated statement about how this will play out. There are plenty of forms of insurance that are legimate but no good.

Insurance is not insurance is not insurance. Coverage is in the details. I see folks all the time with "insurance" that don't get jack out of it yet they pay in through their deductions from work.

The details that turn "yay, I have insurance" into WTF? are the deductibles, the out of pocket expectations, and the network (or panel). As far as I know there are no details. I've heard from Blue Cross/Blue Shield saying they intend to get all over this when it goes to print. I imagine its because they screw more people in Texas than you can shake a stick at.

A fine example: All Texas school employees are covered through BC/BS. This means they pay something every two weeks to be covered. That gives them a shot at "making your deductable." This is essentially paying the menu price for all services until you spend your deductable. For a lot of families this is in the $5k range. After you hit the magic number, the whole time also paying your every 2 week premium, it goes over to insurance payments through the network.

The network is the approved list of providers. Use them only or there is a "reduction in benefits, meaning they will pay nothing up to a percent, can be 40%-ish of charges.

As a provider I am contracted to accept whatever BC/BS determines is a fair price. No, they don't consult providers on what a fair price is.

I stopped contracting with several state-based insurance groups because 1) the contracted rates were so low I might as well call it pro bono and feel good about it. 2) They deny claims like mad because I couldn't figure out the crazy codes required to send in a "clean claim" within the time limits. or 3) They take their sweeeet time paying. I've waited 19 months before to get paid for a job.

My prediction is this mandate goes through and we all start dropping our coins into the slot only to find out that's just the ante to get in on the game. See a provider then get the slow bleed of paying full price & premiums until the unknown out of pocket is met. This is assuming there are actually providers willing to play this game because it's no picnic on the other side either.

It took until 2006 to get rid of the "Remember the Maine" exsise tax. We had the tax for 108 years.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2006-0 ... tax-reform

Remember the Maine, forget the phone tax
May 26, 2006|By DAN THANH DANG | DAN THANH DANG,SUN REPORTER

It took America less than 100 days to start and finish the Spanish-American War. Americans have been paying for that "splendid little war" ever since.

That line on your wireless and landline phone bills that says "federal excise tax" started as a toll on phone calls by wealthy Americans to pay for the war. The war ended quickly, 108 years ago. But the temporary tax did not, growing over time to net more than the wealthy as telephones became ubiquitous.

I wouldn't mind paying a "tax" on it if it were good covergae,like what senaters,congressmen and presidents get for life but we all know that them bastards are gonna take the good and leave the taxpayers with the shitty seconds,the class warfare between our govt and it's citizens is terrible,after a govt official has run their course wheter it be a senator,congressman or who they shoould be booted off the rolls and put on the same plans we have,I bet then the healthcare fiasco would be alot different if that were the case

On the off topic side:

I actually am pretty strong for more decentralization of the Federal government in favor of some greater ability of state policy. The modern instance that pops to mind first (unfortunately, probably) is same sex marriage... another is abortion... but anyway, why should I in California be subject to the whims of South Carolina? I mean, there is a limit to how much a state can act differently, but at a basic level, some states have different needs and requirements, usually on social issues but also on fiscal issues like agrarian or industrial taxation. Iowa and Arizona should be allowed to have as much beneficial policy as possible. HOW you draw and enforce that line under the Federal government, I do not know, which is why I've never come out and said it should exist.


On the on-topic:

I always wonder why no one points out that workers are already paying for health care. Their employers pay for a package and give it to employees, as a result of labor laws after WWII making an insurance policy a "perk" instead of counting towards a salary cap. If employers no longer had to pay for insurance packages, since they pretty much have to unless you are unfortunate enough to work somewhere like Wal-Mart, which has a tremendous number of employees on government healthcare and costs states piles of money. If public healthcare were available, employers would save, and doctors would save, meaning employees could be paid more (presumably to be taxed instead, which is a fair trade for the social equality it provides).

But guess who has a bigger lobbying group than poor people...

A lot of our problems these days is the TBaggers and their interpretation of the Constitution in the same manner as their reading of their bible. I see the analogy between the TBaggers reading the Constitution and their religion completely. They interpret their bible as they want, and they interpret the Constitution the same way. And make no mistake, no one, and certainly no group has EVER had verbatim understanding of either . If you think you know the true, verbatim meaning of either writing, you are deluding yourself. This is supposed to be a nation of LAWS. The Constitution is the collection of policies by which the laws are administered. TBaggers appear to think the Constitution says the government will maintain the armed forces at any cost, and the devil take the rest--- at the taxpayers' expense, which makes the US armed forces the largest socialist organization in history. If you adhered to the "verbatim" doctrine, there would ONLY be the Army and Navy, because that's all the Constitution specifically mentions. And, like I said, the TBaggers want the rest to be total anarchy, so they can make their money tax free (It's unclear WHO they think are supposed to pay the taxes to support the armed forces.) and run their businesses without any restrictions such as morals or redeeming social values at all, and to hell with the poor. If they weren't lazy bastards and social leeches, they wouldn't BE poor, right?

The whole purpose of having laws is to take care of the people. (Even having an Army displays this purpose.) ALL the people. Regressives love the idea of "America;" it's that "United States" part they don't understand. Now that the ACA IS the law, and it IS, if the regressive conservatives repeal it without replacing it, they will seriously piss off the people they claim to represent. They have no replacement. NONE. McConnell and Ryan have been asked what their replacement plan is many times last week. They have no answer--- and that was on Fucks Knews! It is estimated that if ALL the Regressive supported changes are enacted to the health care system--- the pools, the interstate commerce, the restrictions on lawsuits--- ALL together, MIGHT get coverage for 2.7 million people in the next 50 years! Less than 1/10th what will be automatically covered in two years under the ACA. Cost? Obviously, cut the military spending--- do something with that money that will directly benefit the people. The path the conservatives are on is the path that leads to a completely socialistic government. So, you can have a little socialism now, or a lot of socialism later. The existence of a tax supported military shows the founding fathers knew this to be a fact.

Right now, the stupidity shown by the regressive factions of the US government make me ashamed to be part of the human race. Ideology is only valuable if it's a noble ideology, and there is no nobility, no honor, and no compassion in anyone who supports the regressive movement. Ignorance is no longer allowed as an excuse. Neither is "faith." A god is a lie.

I've said this before: I don't bitch because of the higher taxes I've paid all my life because I CHOSE not to have children; they don't get to bitch because they CHOSE not to have health insurance.