Open thread

regressive

Because it’s worth repeating.

Comments

  1. 3

    proud leftist spews:

    2
    That’s an easy allegation, Lebowski. I’m confident you haven’t even looked at the numbers, and certainly haven’t broken them down to do any analysis. That would require work and careful thought, two endeavors that wingnuts tend to avoid. No, it’s much more satisfying to just do knee jerk wingnut spewing. But, I guess a guy’s gotta follow his talents . . .

  2. 4

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    Keith Olbermann went on a rant last night based on the premise that “there is no liberal media.” Here’s Olbermann’s proof that there is no liberal media: “The media which is, after all, owned by corporations naturally leans to the right. Corporations, by definition, lean to the right, towards the status quo.”
     
    Follow the link for the facts about the corporation that pays the salary of olbermann.
      
    I wonder why olbermann lied about something so easily checked? Oh yeah, the ap and cnn only sends factcheckers for right-wingers because they aren’t biased.

  3. 5

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    Bitch
     
    Good thing it was a democrat calling a stewardess a bitch, otherwise it would be big news.
     
    I guess that stewardess was one of the average people and the distinguished senator had to put her in her place.

  4. 6

    spews:

    re 2: It’s a travesty that a drudge like yourself even references that movie. You still don’t know who the big Lebowski is, do you?

    You are like the Chinaman peeing on the Dude’s rug (the one that tied the whole room together).

    “He peed on the Dude’s rug,” said Donny.

  5. 7

    proud leftist spews:

    6
    It is a travesty to see such an empty-minded troll take on the moniker of the Great Lebowsky, who, of course, is not a wingnut.

  6. 8

    spews:

    Donny: “I am the Walrus.”

    re 7: That troll is obviously out of his element. He’s like one of the German nihilists encountering Walter Sobchek.

    “I dabbled in pacifism briefly. But that was before I went to the ‘nam.”

  7. 9

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    from the liberal huffington

    Two of the country’s largest labor groups, the SEIU and the AFL-CIO, are each holding emergency executive meetings today to discuss whether they should support the latest round of health care compromises made by Senate Democrats.

     
    Those union thugs didn’t beat up that black guy for what the democrats are now offering.
     
    I wonder what the agreement was before the assault.

  8. 10

    CC "Bud" Baxter spews:

    Remember one of the Lebowskis in the movie was a first class, right wing asshole lunatic. Not the Jeff Bridges Lebowski, the other one, the old fart in a wheelchair (Philip Seymour Hoffman was his manservant.)

  9. 11

    GBS spews:

    HEY EVERYBODY!!

    Did you know that Glenn Beck has a “RED” phone on his desk with a PUBLIC number.

    Yep, and if the Obama “whitey house” doesn’t refute each and every one of Beck’s lies, inaccuracies, or follies that it’s proof positive in BAT SHIT CRAZY world that Beck’s telling the truth!!

    Ohhh, man, Puddy just laid the gem complete with a racist undertone and everything.

    BatPUDDY!

    Oh, by the way, I have a phone on my desk too. And, just because George W. Bush didn’t call me to refute my claims on HA that he’s a war criminal, means HE’S A FUCKING WAR CRIMINAL.

    Ohhhhhh, Puddy, no wonder you won the Golden Goat of the tear award.

    You can check out Puddy’s remarks here: http://horsesass.org/?p=23097&.....ent-970227

  10. 12

    GBS spews:

    PS @ 11.

    Puddy then went on to tell me “Stay stupid my friend.”

    Baaa haaa haaa haaa haaa

    Beck has a fucking RED phone on his desk so the whitey house can correct him. Puddy believes it and somehow I’m the stupid one???

    That is Puddy’s Christmas gift to me.

    Shit that automatically makes him the front runner for the 2010 Golden Goat of the year award.

    Awesome.

  11. 13

    spews:

    The bottom 50% pay just 2.89% of all income taxes.

    They rich don’t need to pay more, the poor need to pay more of their fare share.

  12. 14

    proud leftist spews:

    GBS
    I’m afraid our friend Puddy is growing ever more mad. He has taken lately to describing Jesus Christ as a warmonger (I guess he forgot the biblical appellation of “Prince of Peace”) Now, to think that Obama should waste 5 seconds of time on an Elmer Gantry like Glen Beck. What world does Puddy live in?

  13. 15

    GBS spews:

    Holy Holes in Doughnuts BatPUDDY, I gotta jump in the Bat mobile and blast off for the bat cave where I’ll be watching Glenn Beck’s show on BatSHITcrazyTV to see if the “whitey house” calls him on his RED bat phone.

    I can hear Beck now:
    “Mr. Black Cracka’ puhlease, call da show mo’fo, cuz’ I jes saeed youz a racists. An’ if you funna don’t be callin’ me dat jez means you a racists who hates black WHITE people.

    MMMMMMMMM, hmmmmmm I saeeeeeds it.

    Obama hates himself cuz he’s part white devil.”

    See dat Fox News viewas?!?!?

    My MUTHA FUCKIN’ PHONE AINT RINGIN’!!!!

    Know wat dat means???

    MMMMMMmmmmmm hmmmmmmm, Obama didn’t refute it so I’m tellin’ da tru’ff! Dat’s right truth with and F. TRU’FF!!

    Peace out, Beck it’s all good in the Fox ‘hood, Da’ Hamptons — OUT!

  14. 16

    spews:

    It’s striking, too, that both poor and rich states are in the “regressive tax” top ten, yet the richest states are not. If we are needing evidence that state and local tax rates have little to do with wealth, we have it here.

    I think that Washington’s tax structure is also very hard on small businesses. The “cut off the top” B&O tax is as bad as additional rent and that, plus the high sales tax, is probably very hard on small shop-owners. It’s not a business-friendly tax climate, unless your business is big.

  15. 17

    spews:

    BTW, brief post on the Senate health care plan as it stands. Bottom line: it’s another “make people pay so we can do something good to them” plan. The libertarians, ack, were right. If you’re above the level of income where a subsidy is offered and below the level where purchasing insurance is easy, the mandates are going to be onerous, and you’re probably going to be paying for insurance that you’ll only be able to afford to use in emergencies. This is going to hurt, and it’s going to make it very hard for a large group of people to save. I suppose, about a decade after this hits, and political convulsions occur, this will be fixed, but it strikes me as a real loser.

  16. 18

    Marvin Stamn spews:

  17. 19

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    Of course al gore doesn’t lie, just because he is profiting off of his claims doesn’t mean he has an agenda.
      
    Al Gore’s melting Arctic claim unites scientist and sceptic alike
     

    Al Gore stood by his claim yesterday that the North Pole could be ice-free within five years, attracting a storm of criticism from scientists and sceptics alike.

     
    When people on both side of the issue agree, that is when the debate is over.
     
    The debate is over, gore lied.

  18. 20

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Republicans Vote Against Jobs

    The House passed a jobs bill today. Not one Republican voted for it. Why are Republicans so against putting people back to work? And why would anyone vote for them?

  19. 21

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @13 “Shit that automatically makes him the front runner for the 2010 Golden Goat of the year award.”

    Why not skip the red tape and award it to him now? We all know he’s gonna win it.

  20. 22

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @18 $3 mil in campaign donations? That’s chickenfeed. Chickenfeed! In the 2000 – 2004 campaign cycle, wealthy donors gave FOUR BILLION DOLLARS to the GOP and got back FOUR HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS OF TAX BREAKS, a 100-to-1 return on investment … at the expense of you and me.

  21. 23

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    22. Roger Rabbit spews:
    and got back FOUR HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS OF TAX BREAKS

     
    A lot of liberals profited too.
     
    from the liberal sfweekly

    According to the controller’s office, San Franciscans’ per-capita income jumped from an already-generous $58,244 in 2004 to $74,515 last year.

  22. 24

    emilee spews:

    @3 That would require work and careful thought, two endeavors that wingnuts tend to avoid.

    ———-

    Well, then, maybe you could explain how the data Goldy posted was derived, Proud Leftist?

  23. 27

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @23 First of all, Marvie Stupes, when you link to an article it HELPS if you link to the FIRST page instead of the LAST page. Idiot!

    (For those of you who didn’t click on the link, Stupes linked to page 5 of a 6-page article. You have to backward-click 4 times to get to the beginning, then forward-click 5 times to read the last page. What a dolt!)

    Of course, Stupes took the quote out of context. Here’s the complete quote:

    “The far more likely scenario is that nothing will happen. The city will continue its orgy of waste and incompetence. San Francisco can afford plenty of both: We’re rich — and getting richer all the time. According to the controller’s office, San Franciscans’ per-capita income jumped from an already-generous $58,244 in 2004 to $74,515 last year.

    “Of course, for many San Franciscans, those numbers represent another failure. They point to an exodus. The city’s middle class is melting away faster than polar ice. With them, economists and demographers say, goes any realistic hope that voters will demand serious change in search of long-term reform.

    “Research by professor Bill Watkins of California Lutheran University over the past decade reveals that San Francisco is shedding its middle-class population at double the state rate. The city, however, is not losing low-income people at nearly the state’s pace — and is gaining wealthy residents at far more than California’s overall rate. In short, we are replacing our middle class with a rich elite and a burgeoning underclass. Watkins’ research also reveals that San Francisco is going gray. The number of city residents between ages 45 and 64 has climbed, while the count of those aged 20 to 44 has dropped. The city, it seems, has become a target destination for the wealthy and retirees. These are not the people who want to make sacrifices now to shore up the city’s future.”

    [Emphases added.]

    Okay. The article makes a persuasive case that San Francisco has a dysfunctional city government. So don’t live there! I sure won’t. Can’t afford to. SF is one of America’s most expensive cities, so if you don’t have a big income, you won’t make it there.

    But Stupes’ point seems to be that average personal incomes in SF are rising, and this proves that SF liberals are doing great economically. Not necessarily. The API is going up because the wealthy are moving in and the middle class is moving out. In that scenario, everyone’s income could be falling, yet the API could still go up, because what’s changing is not how well off city residents are but the population mix.

    By the way, $79K isn’t “wealthy” in SF. In fact, a family would find it hard to live on that in SF. Because, you see, SF is one of America’s most expensive cities. $79K there is more like $49K here. If someone offered me a bus-driving job in SF that pays $79K I wouldn’t take it, because I wouldn’t be able to pay rent.

  24. 28

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @26 So if you don’t understand something, due to lack of education or whatever, it doesn’t exist? I’m sure that goes a long way to explain a lot of wingnuttery.

  25. 29

    emilee spews:

    @28

    What in the world are you talking about? Do you understand the model or don’t you? Do you have any idea what it refers to? Explain it for us?

  26. 31

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    27. Roger Rabbit spews:
    @23 First of all, Marvie Stupes, when you link to an article it HELPS if you link to the FIRST page instead of the LAST page. Idiot!

     
    I was citing my source.
     
    Obviously you didn’t notice that the words I quoted were on the page I linked.
     
    Typical aol user.

  27. 32

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    27. Roger Rabbit spews:
    because the wealthy are moving in and the middle class is moving out.

     
    Wealthy LIBERALS are moving in.
     
    Why does the middle class suffer when a city goes liberal?
     
    Why do liberals hate the middle class?

  28. 33

    Dave spews:

    @27 You have to backward-click 4 times to get to the beginning, then forward-click 5 times to read the last page. What a dolt!

    Only if you’re retarded. I mean, you could have simply clicked the page number at the bottom of the page.

    But, thanks for the tip . . . dolt!

  29. 34

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    33. Dave spews:
    @27 You have to backward-click 4 times to get to the beginning, then forward-click 5 times to read the last page. What a dolt!

    Only if you’re retarded. I mean, you could have simply clicked the page number at the bottom of the page.

    But, thanks for the tip . . . dolt!

     
    Typical aol user.

  30. 35

    Dave spews:

    @34

    Actually, highlight reel material for Roger “you have to backward-click 4 times to get to the beginning, then forward-click 5 times to read the last page” Rabbit.

    It will be a long time before emilee @29 gets her answer on microsimulation from someone so thoroughly tripped up by basic – and explicit – page navigation. Amazing.

  31. 36

    Empty Suit Obama spews:

    27. Roger Rabbit spews:
    (For those of you who didn’t click on the link, Stupes linked to page 5 of a 6-page article. You have to backward-click 4 times to get to the beginning, then forward-click 5 times to read the last page. What a dolt!)

    33. Dave spews:
    Only if you’re retarded. I mean, you could have simply clicked the page number at the bottom of the page.

    HAHA Priceless, Dave. Roger Rabbit is officially, as of that post, Roadkill. Funniest damn thing I’ve seen all day. Picturing Roger Roadkill backward and forward clicking like the technotard rabbit he is.

    …if only Al Gore hadn’t “created” this internet thing…

  32. 37

    spews:

    emilee, the model is summarized on pp. 121-122 of the linked report. There is a reference to a more detailed report on the web site, which may be read here. Basically, a lot of information about income and taxation is gathered. It’s then processed to determine what is called “tax incidence,” that is, the taxes are paid directly by individuals and business and what are passed along. That processing is described in section III of the detailed report, the first paragraph of which says,

    Public finance theory suggests that it is often the case that the person or entity that initially remits a tax or fee is not necessarily the one that bears the ultimate burden of the tax. Some useful recent surveys of the tax incidence literature are Kotlikoff and Summers (1990) and Bradford (1995), the latter being particularly concerned with the distributional analysis of tax burden across income groups. Our approach in the ITEP model was not to break new ground on the incidence debate but to use generally accepted and reasonable guidelines by which to base our analysis. Since assumptions about state and local tax incidence can often be quite different from, say, the incidence of a national tax due to the mobility of factors of production (capital and labor), a number of interesting issues present themselves. Our approach followed closely, in principle, that which the Minnesota Department of Revenue has employed in its incidence analyses, with some differences in underlying assumptions.

    There’s a lot more in that section and citations are given; one of the authors is a certain L. H. Summers, who you may know from other sources.

    If you want a general introduction to the concept of tax incidence and the broader subject of tax policy, I refer you to chapters 4-6 and 21 of Krugman and Wells Microeconomics, which may be read online here.

  33. 38

    Empty Suit Obama spews:

    As long as we’re on the “worth repeating” kick (especially when its conducted by a group that already had its preconceived findings in mind). Perhaps we can interject some reality
    into the “who pays more” discussion.

  34. 39

    Puddybud Remembers Progressives Forget spews:

    GBS loses it again…

    Did you know that Glenn Beck has a “RED” phone on his desk with a PUBLIC number.

    Yep, and if the Obama “whitey house” doesn’t refute each and every one of Beck’s lies, inaccuracies, or follies that it’s proof positive in BAT SHIT CRAZY world that Beck’s telling the truth!!

    GBS, the whitey house used the whitey house blog to “correct” Glenn. That act was unprecedented in every way. So Glenn installed the RED Phone. He challenges the whitey house to call him if he makes a mistake. You see GBS, you need to pay attention to details vs. making an ASS out of yourself in public.

  35. 40

    Puddybud Remembers Progressives Forget spews:

    There goes Proud Leftist making up crap again

    GBS
    I’m afraid our friend Puddy is growing ever more mad. He has taken lately to describing Jesus Christ as a warmonger (I guess he forgot the biblical appellation of “Prince of Peace”)

    Everyone can see the conversation right here. Proud Leftist will try and make up crap because his Biblical understanding is crap. Must be the progressive lawyer in him has replaced the Son of God in him. He refutes the Trinity every time he writes about the Bible.

    The Prince of Peace is Jesus providing the Peace of God for the Sin Troubled Soul. Facts lost on the lawyer and Golden Goat himself Proud Leftist.

  36. 43

    spews:

    BTW, most of the taxes paid by people with lower incomes aren’t Federal income taxes, and many are paid indirectly; property taxes through rent, and so on. Talking only about income tax at best omits a lot. But it’s also widely used as a rhetorical dodge. It doesn’t work on people who can add, though.

    In the case of the cited study, of the majority of state and local taxes the poorest 20% pay in Washington, 76%, are, not very surprisingly, sales and excise taxes, I think including the B&O tax. The remainder are property taxes, though I’m not sure if those are on automobiles, rented housing, or owned housing (probably not.)

  37. 44

    Empty Suit Obama spews:

    @ 41. Or better yet, read below.Gore takes direct and sole credit for inventing something he didn’t. To his credit, the AGW hoax is something he has been able to create, even if it’s not real. The man is a complete charlatan and asshat to boot.

    “I’ve traveled to every part of this country during the last six years. During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet“.~ Al Gore on Wolf Blitzers CNN program, March 9, 1999

  38. 45

    Empty Suit Obama spews:

    Hey, I’m all for a flat tax on all State, Federal and local taxation. Who loses out on a flat tax? The lower income groups. What Goldy is calling for is someone that makes 250K/yr would pay 10x more for the same goods and services that a person that makes 25K/yr receives? That’s completely ignorant thinking that is also contrary to our nations founding principles of fairness. If you want shit like that, take your happy ass to a country that employs such arcane, anti-freedom principles.

    Of course, if lazy people like Goldy just sit back resting on their laurels long enough, he may score some of the wealth that someone sacrificed their time, hours with the family, sleep and energy in order to earn that wealth.

  39. 46

    zdp 189 spews:

    does anyone doubt that our regressivity will climb a notch this year as Dems raise ‘sin’ taxes to close the deficit?

    They could impose taxes on luxury cars, high-end jewelry, art…but they never do, and never will. hmmmm.

  40. 47

    lebowski spews:

    @6,7,810, etc..

    let me know when you guys are done jerking each other off…

    BTW, Jackie Treehorn is the real star of the big lebowski…

  41. 48

    lebowski spews:

    why dont all the socialists who clammor or more taxes simply volunteer to pay more taxes on their own returns?

    damn hypocrites…every one of you socialists looks for loopholes and deductions when you file your taxes.

  42. 50

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    left-wing msnbc reports-

    Poll: Obama approval dips below 50 percent

     
    Is msnbc copying the right-wing polls or do their polls actually prove what the right-wing polls hav been saying.
     

    For the first time, Obama’s overall job approval rating has fallen below 50 percent (to 47 percent). In addition, for the first time since Sept. 2007, a plurality (45 percent) sees the Democratic Party in a negative light. And the percentage believing the country is on the wrong track (55 percent) is at its highest level in the Obama presidency.

      
    Maybe if the democrats keep pushing their socialist agenda they can drop even lower in the polls. Not only do I bet they can, I bet the democrats will drop lower in the polls.

  43. 51

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    A liberal nbc poll proves the right-wing polls accurate by admitting-
    NBC POLL: PUBLIC SOURS ON HEALTH REFORM
     

    Just 32 percent say it’s a good idea, versus 47 percent who say it’s a bad idea.

    In addition, for the first time in the survey, a plurality prefers the status quo to reform. By a 44-41 percent margin, respondents say it would be better to keep the current system than to pass Obama’s health plan.

     
    A majority of those polled said it would be better to keep the system as it is.
     
    Will the democrats listen to the people that pay their salary or will the democrats ignore the will of voters?

  44. 52

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    Another left-winger admits the democrats are leaderless. I guess he doesn’t see voting “present” as leadership.
     

    I’ve heard people say that it’s not fair to criticize the Democrats for botching health care reform because the Democrats never truly had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

    But then how was George Bush so effective in passing legislation during his presidency when he never had more than 55 Republicans in the Senate? In fact, during Bush’s most effective years, from 2001 to 2005, the GOP had a grand total of 50, and then 51, Senators.

      
    Wow, bush did better with less. And to think that bush was never a community organizer like oba-mao.
     

    What the GOP lacked in numbers, they made up for in backbone, cunning and leadership. Say what you will about George Bush, he wasn’t afraid of a fight. If anything, the Bush administration, and the Republicans in Congress, seemed to relish taking on Democrats, and seeing just how far they could get Democratic members of Congress to cave on their promises and their principles. Hell, even Senator Barack Obama, who once famously promised to lead a filibuster against the FISA domestic eavesdropping bill, suddenly changed his mind and actually voted for the legislation. Such is the power of a president and a congressional leadership with balls and smarts.

      
    He points out how oba-mao caved to the pressure of president bush and the republicans.
     
    Why did the democrats elect someone that caved to bush and doesn’t provide leadership?
     

    We lost real health care reform not because we don’t have a “real” filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. We lost health care reform because we don’t have a real leader anywhere in our party.

     
    Voting “present” does not make a leader.
     
    Voting present is the act of someone that doesn’t want to take a stand and be accountable.
     
    All those words and the author ever made the connection.
     
    Possibly the bush agenda was not as radical as the oba-mao agenda.
     
    Oba-mao wants free government health care, the nation doesn’t. Out of touch with america, just like brave rabbit hunter jimmy carter.

  45. 53

    lebowski spews:

    the lefties drank the media hyped obama kook-aid and now they are bummed because the wool got pulled over their eyes.

    People have been saying since the election that obama was a fake – and now progressives are getting all boohoo because they got snookered….LMFAO.

    WE TOLD YOU IT WAS GONNA HAPPEN….

    suckers………how you liking that chicago policitcal machine now?

  46. 54

    spews:

    ESO, Gore was telling the truth. He did take the initiative in taking us from the research ARPAnet to the public internet. It had been talked about before, but Gore was the one who actually did it.

    And it’s possible that no-one else would have done it, and our commercial data networks would be more like the the cell phone networks, competing, with every e-mail charged at exorbitant rates, and no public web at all.

  47. 56

    spews:

    re 53: As flawed as Obama is, he’s still better than any candidate you have to offer.

    And, if you’d been paying attention, you’d know that the liberal strategy is to elect BETTER Democrats in the future. The only ones who saw Obama as the Progressive Saviour were the young voters and the straw man voters created by Fox Not-News/Propaganda.

    What is the Republican selling point to the voter: “Sure we fucked the country up over the past 30 years, but the Democrats haven’t fixed it in one year, so vote for us!!”

  48. 57

    Politically Incorrect spews:

    So, if a an Ameicano costs $2.00 at Starbucks, should we adjust the price for rich people to, say, $200.00 for an Americano and make it free for those who earn less than $20,000 per year?

    Stop trying to use the tax code to re-distribute wealth!

  49. 58

    spews:

    re 57: How about military service? If fighting in Iraq is so important to our national well-being, shouldn’t the sons and daughters of the rich spend as much time there performing dangerous duty as an ‘illegal alien’ from Tijuana or poor kid from Appalachia?

    That kind of ‘wisdom’ cuts two ways. Maybe Bill Gate’s kids should be forced to serve burgers at Dick’s Drive In (where you can get instant service).

  50. 59

    spews:

    re 57: You defend the whole system of inequality of opportunity because you are under the illusion that if you work hard and have a little luck, you too can join the ranks of the super rich. But after a lifetime of trying and succeeding up to a certain point, I am trying to tell you that there are institutional barriers that are in place or will be created by the priviliged class to hold you down.

    If you are incapable of seeing them in your own life and times, just reflect upon the fact that no matter how hard he tried, Dred Scott would never in his entire life have a realistic opportunity of becoming majority whip.

    Generations of fighting for every step of the way have finally given us a black president — but it is a fight that takes generations.

    You are blind to the battle for progress in your own generation.

    You just sit on the sidelines sniggering, pontificating, and offering lame little jokes and homilies.

  51. 60

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    59. The Caveman Economist spews:
    re 57: You defend the whole system of inequality of opportunity because you are under the illusion that if you work hard and have a little luck, you too can join the ranks of the super rich. But after a lifetime of trying and succeeding up to a certain point, I am trying to tell you that there are institutional barriers that are in place or will be created by the priviliged class to hold you down.

     
    Okay headless, tell us these institutional barriers that stopped you from being successful.

  52. 61

    GBS spews:

    Marvin @ 51 wrote:

    A majority of those polled said it would be better to keep the system as it is.

    Will the democrats listen to the people that pay their salary or will the democrats ignore the will of voters?

    This a rare occurrence but I have to agree with Marvin on this issue.

    It is by far better to keep the status quo instead of passing this version of health care that has been shaped to try and accommodate those who are more socially conservative.

    This bill would do nothing but give Republicans campaign fodder for generations each time the health care rates went up, an elderly person had to pay more, or services were capped.

    There would be no need to take Democrats behind the woodshed to beat them. Nope. It would be done on the steps of the Capital or the front lawn of the White House for all to see each time the Democrats proposed ANYTHING!

    It’s the ultimate “WE TOLD YOU SO!!!”

    The best course of action is to kill this bill. Then, under reconciliation ram Medicare for all through the senate. Just 50 votes plus Biden’s vote is all that’s needed.

    No reforms whatsoever on the insurance companies. They could be free to do whatever they please. Treat customers any way they want. Deny coverage allllll day long. Raise premiums sky high and roll around in their customer’s cash.

    For 5 years Americans could choose Medicare. Then, when the sunset clause kicks in we’ll see if the Republicans have the political nerve to take away Medicare for all.

    Just like the Tea Bagged Granny who doesn’t want health care reform, but says “KEEP YOUR DAMNED HANDS OFF MY MEDICARE!!” Americans will realize they prefer Medicare for all vs. employer based health care.

    Of course, there will be no mandatory buy in to Medicare and if you want to keep your employer based health care plan you can.

    Medicare would just have to try and compete with the great service the insurance companies provide. **snicker, snicker**.

  53. 63

    GBS spews:

    62. Marvin Stamn spews:

    61. GBS spews:
    Marvin @ 51 wrote:

    http://horsesass.org/?p=23124#comment-970257

    My money says you lack the self-control to ignore me.

    Marvin,

    Just read your “challenge” you linked to.

    We ignore each other until 12/31/2010. If you can ignore me without replying to me, mentioning me or referring to me in any way, and I do the exact same, I’ll buy you and Puddy all the sushi you can eat at the sushi restaurant of your choice in Seattle.

    Afterwards there’s an Irish Pub I frequent I’d like to take you to. You might say it’s a Son’s of Erin place. I’ll buy you a pint or two of Authur’s finest, or whatever you want to drink. I’d like you to meet some of my Sinn Fein brothers, too.

    Deal?

  54. 64

    spews:

    re 60: Your problem is that you assume a conclusion.

    Where did I say that I was not successful?

    I stated that there were, “…after a lifetime of trying and succeeding up to a certain point, … institutional barriers that are in place or will be created by the priviliged class to hold you down.”

    Show me where I am wrong.

  55. 65

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    63. GBS spews:
    62. Marvin Stamn spews:
    Marvin,
    We ignore each other until 12/31/2010. If you can ignore me without replying to me, mentioning me or referring to me in any way, and I do the exact same, I’ll buy you and Puddy all the sushi you can eat at the sushi restaurant of your choice in Seattle.

     
    So if I ignore you AND you ignore me you’ll buy dinner?
     
    Damn sporty of your squirt.

  56. 66

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    64. The Caveman Economist spews:
    re 60: Your problem is that you assume a conclusion.

    Where did I say that I was not successful?

    I stated that there were, “…after a lifetime of trying and succeeding up to a certain point, … institutional barriers that are in place or will be created by the priviliged class to hold you down.”

    Show me where I am wrong.

     
    So you weren’t talking about personal experience with institutional barriers?
     
    If there were barriers, how did you overcome them?
     
    What makes you special?

  57. 67

    GBS spews:

    Marvin @ 65:

    Yeah, damn sprorty of me, but, do we have a deal; this deal?

    We ignore each other until 12/31/2010. If you can ignore me without replying to me, mentioning me or referring to me in any way, and I do the exact same, I’ll buy you and Puddy all the sushi you can eat at the sushi restaurant of your choice in Seattle.

    Afterwards there’s an Irish Pub I frequent I’d like to take you to. You might say it’s a Son’s of Erin place. I’ll buy you a pint or two of Authur’s finest, or whatever you want to drink. I’d like you to meet some of my Sinn Fein brothers, too.

    When you confirm the bet as mentioned in this post then we can begin.

    Do we have a deal?

  58. 68

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    67. GBS spews:
    Marvin @ 65:

    Yeah, damn sprorty of me, but, do we have a deal; this deal?

     
    If you admit that you can’t compete with me on a level field I will agree with your lopsided deal.
     
    But if you believe you are better than me, lets flip your agreement.
     
    YOU can’t reply to me, mention/reference me in any way.
     
    And I’ll do the same.
     
    If I can’t refrain from replying to me or mentioning me, you lose and then buy Puddy and I dinner.
     
    Do we have a deal?

  59. 69

    GBS spews:

    Marvin @ 68:

    **heavy sigh**

    Are you reading my post close enough to understand the terms of the bet? I want to make sure you understand what you are getting into.

    Read this again:

    We ignore each other until 12/31/2010. If you can ignore me without replying to me, mentioning me or referring to me in any way, and I do the exact same, I’ll buy you and Puddy all the sushi you can eat at the sushi restaurant of your choice in Seattle.

    Afterwards there’s an Irish Pub I frequent I’d like to take you to. You might say it’s a Son’s of Erin place. I’ll buy you a pint or two of Aurthur’s finest, or whatever you want to drink. I’d like you to meet some of my Sinn Fein brothers, too.

    Since I’m the only one risking money here and you’re risking nothing let’s do this; if you can’t uphold your end of the bet, Goldy gets to ban you from HA forever.

    I do not understand how you can arrive at the conclusion that this is some how a lopsided offer when I say I must do “the exact same” as you.

    IF, you can do this then I will buy you and Puddy sushi at any restaurant of your choice in Seattle. Afterwards we go to my Irish pub for a few drinks.

    Deal?

  60. 70

    Marvin Stamn spews:

    69. GBS spews:
    Marvin @ 68:

    **heavy sigh**

     
    There goes your mancrush on me again.
      

    Since I’m the only one risking money here and you’re risking nothing let’s do this; if you can’t uphold your end of the bet, Goldy gets to ban you from HA forever.

     
    It doesn’t matter, I’ll go along with it. I’ll play you into replying with ease. The same ease that prompted you to exclaim you “had the proof.” The same ease that got you to play the “faggot” card.
      

    I do not understand how you can arrive at the conclusion that this is some how a lopsided offer when I say I must do “the exact same” as you.

     
    The exact same- so you have to never reply to gbs, not mention him in anyway?

    IF, you can do this then I will buy you and Puddy sushi at any restaurant of your choice in Seattle.

     
    How about a second bet? I bet that you will be like mark and welsh on the bet. See, that’s how confident that I’m going to punk you, that I’m betting you’re a poor sport and won’t pay up. Usually, the kind of person that hits a superior officer welshes on bets.
     

    Afterwards we go to my Irish pub for a few drinks.

     
    I don’t drink alcohol. Is drinking a problem for you, I’ve seen you mention it many times. A lot of people like you self-medicate with alcohol to help with their anger issues. Do you feel that is the case for you?