Recently people are complaining that the President has been taken out of context. That when he said “if you have a successful business, YOU didn’t build that” the republicans and conservatives are all taking it out of context.
Here is a question for you, How else can that be taken except for “you did not cause that business to exist, others built it.”?
“But he said more than that”… yes, you are right, he also said (before that quote) that there is an infrastructure of teachers and firefighters and police officers and roads that caused the business to exist.
Well that is all well and good, except for the factual point that business existed long before ANY of those things. But, looking at the conditions that exist today, is that really true?
According to what Obama said it seems that he believes the teachers and firefighters and police officers and roadworkers are really the people who are responsible for the success of the business.
Here is the problem.
Today the police are always there. Whether I build a business or not but my business does not/ will not exist because of them. And the same goes for the firefighters and the teachers and the road workers and all the others. But they have not ALWAYS been there. In fact many of them would not exist if it weren’t for business needs CAUSING them to exist.
In fact, for today I want to use the example of some successful businesses. Let’s consider Microsoft or Apple or Google or Ben and Jerry’s…
All of these businesses exist because the people in charge of them had an idea and worked to make them happen. If Bill Gates had not had the idea for how to make software for Microsoft, That business would not exist. Period end of story.
If these people had not taken out loans on their own or worked insane hours or invested so heavily of their own. Then these would not exist.
In fact if you think about it there was a guy who had a couple of thousand different patents and inventions. We would not even be able to live the way we do today if it had not been for him. And yet he was never formally educated past third grade because his teachers kicked him out of school for being “wild, incorrigible and in general, unteachable”
His Name? Thomas Alva Edison. You know inventor of the lightbulb and the phonograph… for starters…
I guess all that “infrastructure” really kinda didn’t work for him did it now? The infrastructure, in the guise of his teachers, completely wrote him off and consigned him to nothing. And yet how many of his peers who went through that public school system were the successes that he was?
As for all those other things, every business pays taxes already. In fact many of them, in order to build in the first place, are required to foot the bill for things like road improvements and easements all on their own. So all that “government help” that Obama touts is really just a bunch of bull pucky.
These businesses exist because the effort to make them work is made by the business owner.
The flip side of the same coin is IF Obama is right and the government is responsible for the success of those businesses and it is not the work and sacrifice of the business owner, then why do so many businesses fail?
If the government is responsible for the success of all those businesses that are doing well then conversely that would have to mean that the government is also equally responsible for the failure of every single failed business.
And if the government is responsible for all the failed business then doesn’t that mean that they, themselves, have failed? And if they are responsible then they also ought to be required to make it up in amends to every man wqoman and child who is suffering for those faliures.
They have to make up the losses for all the entrepreneurs who tried to start a business? (and their families and descendants.)
I would think so.
Let’s face it if we look at the difference between businesses run by individuals and ones run or supported by the government the trend is clear. The successful businesses are ALL the ones that are run by private individuals. All the government businesses are mostly costly boondoggles or they are entirely unsuccessful.
Here is a list of businesses that the government has either taken over or developed that cannot seem to operate in a way that makes a profit.
(in other words, successfully)
Amtrak
The United States Post Office.
NASA
The Veteran’s Administration
Social Security
Medicare
Medicaid
Fanny Mae
Freddy Mac
Also there are businesses that the government has “bailed out” which are still not doing as well as their counterparts like GM or ones that have completely failed (Solyndra).
So I have to say that the idea of the government being responsible for successful business is a total lie. Yes I said it this is a lie.
And there is no way you can take the words of the president and put them “into context” so they mean anything else. In fact, the only way you CAN make the president’s words mean anything other than what the conservatives are saying they mean IS to take them out of context.
August 31, 2012
August 30, 2012
Flat tax conversation
Everyone is going on about how great a flat tax would be... I’m not sure they really thought it through. A flat tax would hurt the poor a lot while making the rich richer. The guys I heard were talking about how great a flat tax would be and they said that all you need to do is have a good budget.
I tried to point out that sometimes it doesn't matter how good your budget is. They were adamant though that if there were a flat tax then the economy would be better and the people’s needs would be easier to meet.
I think there is an element of naivete to that though because that assumes that all the "savings" that businessmen get would translate into more hiring or more pay raises and that is not going to happen in many cases.
Oh yeah it is a better idea than having the government try to sort it out because they will spend 98 cents of every dollar on that kind of program in bureaucracy fees.
In a private Business a LOT of those businessmen are going to just pocket the extra and say ohh look at me how rich I am getting
Just like the airlines did when the taxes on them expired last year.
Now, they did not pay their employees better and they did not hire more people and they did not refund or lower prices of passengers... they just pocketed the difference and patted themselves on the back for being such good businessmen that they were making more profit.
This all means that it is clear we will not be able to clear up the tax issue easily. But everyone wants to go on and on about it.
So like I said first and foremost we need to just SHUT UP about ANY tax issue and STOP the wasteful spending.
Then we need to figure out how to make sure that people are getting a LIVABLE wage (not minimum wage)
THEN we can focus on how to do tax reform
If we could link the minimum pay index to an area’s cost of living that would be a start.
For example if you live in a place where the cost of living is really high so as to make it unaffordable, then the business would have to pay higher wages.
If you live somewhere cheaper, the wages can go down some. This ought to make at least the intelligent businessmen interested in doing what they can to make the area where they operate more affordable.
Get it through to the business/es that the more they charge the more it drives up cost of living, the more the cost of living goes up the more they have to pay etc... Then they will maybe learn that they can control their costs by charging LESS, or that they can make the whole area wealthier through the rates they charge.
I think it is a good idea and while I have mentioned it to myself out loud I think this is the first time I have really trotted it out here*. What do you think
Maybe if I could get this one out there people would go "HEY that sounds like a good idea!"
Of course I don’t stop there, the next step to my idea was then we could link taxes to the same index.
Now personally I am starting to think that property tax is evil… (who wants to keep buying the same book or toy or whatever over and over again? MOST things we buy you pay for it once and then that is it.)
However if property taxes were linked to this plan “landlords” would realize the more they charge for rent the more they will have to pay in taxes because the Cost of living is high.
Ultimately it would be a percentage factor but then they could learn to save money from taxes by giving renters a break
That still allows for growth because they will make profits but at the same time it controls growth to what society can afford. (NO Bubble markets)
Of course the issue will still has people saying “if everyone were paying a flat tax the economy would be better and we wouldn't be in this mess.”
I want to scream here, but noi one listens.
Again, the problem isn't taxes or economy here! the reason we are in this mess is because of bad loan practices! a flat tax would not have prevented that or fixed it."
Let’s all stop going on about taxes, taxes, taxes. Instead let’s all focus on the real problem, spending, spending, spending.
Shut up about the taxes and address the real issue and now I have gone full circle
As a side note here I have a question regarding a flat tax... would churches have to pay it too?
They get tax shelters now and the idea behind a flat tax is to eliminate preferential treatment with taxes, which in turn would mean that to be fair we would need to eliminate that exempt status, same with 401s and all other tax shelters. After all in order for a flat tax to "work" we would have to eliminate all the exceptions.
But as I, and others, have pointed out before;
You could take ALL the money that exists in this country, all the money that has ever existed and all the money that WILL ever exist; and it would not be enough to deal with the debt we have today.
It won’t deal with all the ongoing costs that we are looking at, and until we get spending under control it will never deal with anything.
So since the people who are talking about raising taxes are refusing to consider reducing expenses we will never be able to get out of the hole we are in.
I tried to point out that sometimes it doesn't matter how good your budget is. They were adamant though that if there were a flat tax then the economy would be better and the people’s needs would be easier to meet.
I think there is an element of naivete to that though because that assumes that all the "savings" that businessmen get would translate into more hiring or more pay raises and that is not going to happen in many cases.
Oh yeah it is a better idea than having the government try to sort it out because they will spend 98 cents of every dollar on that kind of program in bureaucracy fees.
In a private Business a LOT of those businessmen are going to just pocket the extra and say ohh look at me how rich I am getting
Just like the airlines did when the taxes on them expired last year.
Now, they did not pay their employees better and they did not hire more people and they did not refund or lower prices of passengers... they just pocketed the difference and patted themselves on the back for being such good businessmen that they were making more profit.
This all means that it is clear we will not be able to clear up the tax issue easily. But everyone wants to go on and on about it.
So like I said first and foremost we need to just SHUT UP about ANY tax issue and STOP the wasteful spending.
Then we need to figure out how to make sure that people are getting a LIVABLE wage (not minimum wage)
THEN we can focus on how to do tax reform
If we could link the minimum pay index to an area’s cost of living that would be a start.
For example if you live in a place where the cost of living is really high so as to make it unaffordable, then the business would have to pay higher wages.
If you live somewhere cheaper, the wages can go down some. This ought to make at least the intelligent businessmen interested in doing what they can to make the area where they operate more affordable.
Get it through to the business/es that the more they charge the more it drives up cost of living, the more the cost of living goes up the more they have to pay etc... Then they will maybe learn that they can control their costs by charging LESS, or that they can make the whole area wealthier through the rates they charge.
I think it is a good idea and while I have mentioned it to myself out loud I think this is the first time I have really trotted it out here*. What do you think
Maybe if I could get this one out there people would go "HEY that sounds like a good idea!"
Of course I don’t stop there, the next step to my idea was then we could link taxes to the same index.
Now personally I am starting to think that property tax is evil… (who wants to keep buying the same book or toy or whatever over and over again? MOST things we buy you pay for it once and then that is it.)
However if property taxes were linked to this plan “landlords” would realize the more they charge for rent the more they will have to pay in taxes because the Cost of living is high.
Ultimately it would be a percentage factor but then they could learn to save money from taxes by giving renters a break
That still allows for growth because they will make profits but at the same time it controls growth to what society can afford. (NO Bubble markets)
Of course the issue will still has people saying “if everyone were paying a flat tax the economy would be better and we wouldn't be in this mess.”
I want to scream here, but noi one listens.
Again, the problem isn't taxes or economy here! the reason we are in this mess is because of bad loan practices! a flat tax would not have prevented that or fixed it."
Let’s all stop going on about taxes, taxes, taxes. Instead let’s all focus on the real problem, spending, spending, spending.
Shut up about the taxes and address the real issue and now I have gone full circle
As a side note here I have a question regarding a flat tax... would churches have to pay it too?
They get tax shelters now and the idea behind a flat tax is to eliminate preferential treatment with taxes, which in turn would mean that to be fair we would need to eliminate that exempt status, same with 401s and all other tax shelters. After all in order for a flat tax to "work" we would have to eliminate all the exceptions.
But as I, and others, have pointed out before;
You could take ALL the money that exists in this country, all the money that has ever existed and all the money that WILL ever exist; and it would not be enough to deal with the debt we have today.
It won’t deal with all the ongoing costs that we are looking at, and until we get spending under control it will never deal with anything.
So since the people who are talking about raising taxes are refusing to consider reducing expenses we will never be able to get out of the hole we are in.
August 29, 2012
Liberal shortsightedness
I have the dubious pleasure of having to pass a house on the way to and from work where they are VERY Political, Liberal, outspoken. And they regularly put up some of the most inane things… the latest one is a neon green sign with black lettering nailed to their fence that says…
“Do you Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in TARP money, gave themselves billions in bonuses, paid no taxes, And dumped a million gallons of oil in the Gulf of Mexico? Yeah. Me Neither.”
Here are the problems I have with that.
1. None of the entities listed here have done for us what the businesses that are being picked on in the statement have. Public employees. PBS and NPR have never employed thousands of people, they have never provided us with the oil or products that we NEED for survival and, some of these would not be possible if it weren’t for the businesses that are being railroaded by this statement.
2. The person/s who post these things refuse to understand that if it were not for the taxes that businesses pay then the public employees would not be paid and the support would be dropped for NPR and PBS.
None of the “examples” that were used in this really contribute to the nation as a whole. Oh yeah NPR will play classical music and PBS will show sesame street and these are great for cultural purposes but if we cannot eat or keep warm or healthy then those points (culture) become unimportant. Before you can feed a person’s soul you have to feed their body, and none of the examples given do anything to feed a persons body.
“Do you Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in TARP money, gave themselves billions in bonuses, paid no taxes, And dumped a million gallons of oil in the Gulf of Mexico? Yeah. Me Neither.”
Here are the problems I have with that.
1. None of the entities listed here have done for us what the businesses that are being picked on in the statement have. Public employees. PBS and NPR have never employed thousands of people, they have never provided us with the oil or products that we NEED for survival and, some of these would not be possible if it weren’t for the businesses that are being railroaded by this statement.
2. The person/s who post these things refuse to understand that if it were not for the taxes that businesses pay then the public employees would not be paid and the support would be dropped for NPR and PBS.
None of the “examples” that were used in this really contribute to the nation as a whole. Oh yeah NPR will play classical music and PBS will show sesame street and these are great for cultural purposes but if we cannot eat or keep warm or healthy then those points (culture) become unimportant. Before you can feed a person’s soul you have to feed their body, and none of the examples given do anything to feed a persons body.
August 28, 2012
The God syndrome.
I figured this out, most liberals are either pretty frustrated with God or they just do not believe in God. I mean think about it.
They want people to be able to have ANY sex they want ANY time ANY where. This is against God’s word on the subject, you know the topic… where Paul says “FLEE all sexual immorality” because that is against God’s wishes.
I can already hear the growing dissent… “no GOD didn’t say it PAUL did you said so right there…” um yeah and IF I had not pointed out that it was Paul who said it would you have even known? I think not. But the point is that
(1) God is unchanging. The Bible tells us that he is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. He is consistent never wavering the Alpha and the Omega The beginning and the end!
(2) GOD said in the old testament that we need to abstain from Sexual immorality. That we ought to only have sex within the bonds of matrimony (or within marriage) that we ought not to have sex with anyone who is not our spouse.*
(3) God has always punished those who disobey him.
“But” they say “YOU don’t always get it right.” And they are right about that. I am not claiming that I am better than they are.
Let me be totally honest here… I AM A SINNER! If it would make a difference I would be happy to make that declaration in front of everyone I know. I have in fact done exactly that. In fact let me make it known here and now
I HAVE LIED!
IHAVE CHEATED!
I HAVE STOLEN!
I HAVE LUSTED AFTER WOMEN WHO WERE NOT MY WIFE!
I HAVE COVETED MY NEIGHBORS STUFF!
I HAVE COMMITTED MURDER IN MY HEART!
I HAVE DISHONORED MY MOTHER AND MY FATHER!
I HAVE HAD OTHER GOD’S OVER THE LORD GOD IN HEAVEN!
I HAVE WORSHIPPED FALSE IDOLS!
I HAVE MISUSED THE NAME OF GOD!
I HAVE FORGOTTEN THE SABBATH OR NOT RESTED ON IT!
In other words I have basically broken EVERY SINGLE ONE OF GOD’S TEN COMMANDMENTS!
I am no better than any other. And I deserve to be punished! BUT, here is the thing, the punishment has already been laid out and the pain and suffering of my punishment has been done.
And that punishment was paid. By Jesus!
I am not better than anyone, I am only forgiven,
God has not changed! He still punishes the sin.
It is just that Jesus took my sin. And when I chose to follow Christ I changed.
I changed! NOT God.
I still sin because I am human and it is part of my nature. But I am trying to follow Christ and when I DO sin I ask for Christ to intervene I repent of my sin and I turn to try to do what is right and good.
Liberals might want to say that God has changed because he does not punish us today like he once did, or that they can live how they want because the penalty no longer is upon us but here is the point to that… IF you do not accept Jesus and ADMIT you are a sinner then repent of your sin and ADMIT your need for Jesus then YOU will end up paying that penalty.
But I need to get back to my point.
The thing is that it would seem to me that the Liberals tend to either think that they are better than God and they can therefore BE him or they just think he does not exist.
In fact, as to the second point, I recently watched a debate on Facebook and while the end result was less than inspiring I was very intrigued by how many of the people taking the liberal side of things insisted that there is no such thing as God. That he was/is nothing more than a made up fiction. Existing only in a world of our mind’s creation.
Makes me think, for their sake, they better hope they are right.
But I do not think they are.
IF they are right then there is no hope for any of us. This life is all we get and so all the suffering you are going through is for nothing. Maybe that is what they want though, for us to have no hope.
Or maybe it is another agency, working through them, who wants us to have no hope.
BUT if I am right then there IS hope, unfortunately that hope is one that is limited to those who think as I do, that is to say the only real hope is for those who accepted Jesus as their Lord and Savior.
Make NO mistake though, God will not be fooled and he does not need a jury of our peers. If you choose to live your life the way you want here on earth and refuse to submit to the lordship of God in your life, never accepting Christ as your savior, then you will have to deal with the consequences. There is no construct of man that will supersede the capabilities of God.
Still,
Liberals want to have the lordship over all. They want to tell God that they have it all under control and he can just sit back and let them do it. So I guess that means that they have a God complex.
To them either there is NO god or if there is a god, They are it.
*Which, by the way, is one of the reasons that Christians are against the idea of Homosexuals getting married. To grant them marriage would seem to legitimize their unnatural lusts for one another.
Which, I believe, in turn the homosexual would then try to argue that they did nothing wrong since they were in a “marital relationship” with their “Partner” at the time that they had sex.
They want people to be able to have ANY sex they want ANY time ANY where. This is against God’s word on the subject, you know the topic… where Paul says “FLEE all sexual immorality” because that is against God’s wishes.
I can already hear the growing dissent… “no GOD didn’t say it PAUL did you said so right there…” um yeah and IF I had not pointed out that it was Paul who said it would you have even known? I think not. But the point is that
(1) God is unchanging. The Bible tells us that he is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. He is consistent never wavering the Alpha and the Omega The beginning and the end!
(2) GOD said in the old testament that we need to abstain from Sexual immorality. That we ought to only have sex within the bonds of matrimony (or within marriage) that we ought not to have sex with anyone who is not our spouse.*
(3) God has always punished those who disobey him.
“But” they say “YOU don’t always get it right.” And they are right about that. I am not claiming that I am better than they are.
Let me be totally honest here… I AM A SINNER! If it would make a difference I would be happy to make that declaration in front of everyone I know. I have in fact done exactly that. In fact let me make it known here and now
I HAVE LIED!
IHAVE CHEATED!
I HAVE STOLEN!
I HAVE LUSTED AFTER WOMEN WHO WERE NOT MY WIFE!
I HAVE COVETED MY NEIGHBORS STUFF!
I HAVE COMMITTED MURDER IN MY HEART!
I HAVE DISHONORED MY MOTHER AND MY FATHER!
I HAVE HAD OTHER GOD’S OVER THE LORD GOD IN HEAVEN!
I HAVE WORSHIPPED FALSE IDOLS!
I HAVE MISUSED THE NAME OF GOD!
I HAVE FORGOTTEN THE SABBATH OR NOT RESTED ON IT!
In other words I have basically broken EVERY SINGLE ONE OF GOD’S TEN COMMANDMENTS!
I am no better than any other. And I deserve to be punished! BUT, here is the thing, the punishment has already been laid out and the pain and suffering of my punishment has been done.
And that punishment was paid. By Jesus!
I am not better than anyone, I am only forgiven,
God has not changed! He still punishes the sin.
It is just that Jesus took my sin. And when I chose to follow Christ I changed.
I changed! NOT God.
I still sin because I am human and it is part of my nature. But I am trying to follow Christ and when I DO sin I ask for Christ to intervene I repent of my sin and I turn to try to do what is right and good.
Liberals might want to say that God has changed because he does not punish us today like he once did, or that they can live how they want because the penalty no longer is upon us but here is the point to that… IF you do not accept Jesus and ADMIT you are a sinner then repent of your sin and ADMIT your need for Jesus then YOU will end up paying that penalty.
But I need to get back to my point.
The thing is that it would seem to me that the Liberals tend to either think that they are better than God and they can therefore BE him or they just think he does not exist.
In fact, as to the second point, I recently watched a debate on Facebook and while the end result was less than inspiring I was very intrigued by how many of the people taking the liberal side of things insisted that there is no such thing as God. That he was/is nothing more than a made up fiction. Existing only in a world of our mind’s creation.
Makes me think, for their sake, they better hope they are right.
But I do not think they are.
IF they are right then there is no hope for any of us. This life is all we get and so all the suffering you are going through is for nothing. Maybe that is what they want though, for us to have no hope.
Or maybe it is another agency, working through them, who wants us to have no hope.
BUT if I am right then there IS hope, unfortunately that hope is one that is limited to those who think as I do, that is to say the only real hope is for those who accepted Jesus as their Lord and Savior.
Make NO mistake though, God will not be fooled and he does not need a jury of our peers. If you choose to live your life the way you want here on earth and refuse to submit to the lordship of God in your life, never accepting Christ as your savior, then you will have to deal with the consequences. There is no construct of man that will supersede the capabilities of God.
Still,
Liberals want to have the lordship over all. They want to tell God that they have it all under control and he can just sit back and let them do it. So I guess that means that they have a God complex.
To them either there is NO god or if there is a god, They are it.
*Which, by the way, is one of the reasons that Christians are against the idea of Homosexuals getting married. To grant them marriage would seem to legitimize their unnatural lusts for one another.
Which, I believe, in turn the homosexual would then try to argue that they did nothing wrong since they were in a “marital relationship” with their “Partner” at the time that they had sex.
August 27, 2012
the Olympic McMuffin
I was catching up on some tv watching yesterday. And something that came to my attention was Gold Medal winner Gabby Douglas on the Tonight show with Jay Leno.
I thought I would watch for a couple of minutes and so I heard Jay Leno ask her what she ate after the Olympics and she replied that she had had an Egg McMuffin from McDonald’s.
Sitting right next to her though was apparently the first lady Michelle Obama who said “oh Gabby your hurting me here.” Referring to her drive to make all Americans eat healthier.
Gabby laughingly apologized and I thought, “wow I wouldn’t have done that.” I mean no disrespect to either of those people I saw but really come on.
I know that Gabby is a teenager who is being put into new situations that are beyond her experience and I know that MOST people would be a little awestruck to be hobnobbing with national movers and shakers. But I wish that she could have turned to the first lady and said something like…
“listen, I am a Gold Medal winner of the Olympics! I worked hard I trained hard and I did a VERY good job! I think after all the work and exercise and effort I made that I am entitled to enjoy ONE SINGLE EGG MCMUFFIN without you breathing down my neck about it.
“I am NOT over weight, I am NOT obese!”
“I am a healthy young girl who enjoys occasional treats like anyone else does and I am also pretty sure, that with my training regimen, tomorrow I will more than work off ANY calories that I might have gained by eating a fast food sandwich!”
“Besides which it is NOT your place to tell me what I can or cannot eat!”
Or to make that shorter… “You know what? Lay off! I EARNED IT!”
What I find even more disturbing about this is the fact that Mrs. Obama is very quick to tell all of us (including Olympic gold medal winners now, who know VERY well what kind of calorie consumption they can have) how to eat. Meantime EVERY SINGLE FOOD that she has deemed to be bad for all of us, she and her husband will gulp down as fast as they can.
For example, Every where that Michelle Obama has gone we see her eating Burgers, Fries, Onion Rings, Ice Cream, Milkshakes and so on.
When asked about her husband’s (or her) food preferences she mentioned, Guacamole, Onion Rings, Nacho chips and Burgers.
But she has decided that Gabby (ONCE more let me remind you, a girl who has just won several GOLD medals for her athleticism in the Olympics) cannot have an egg McMuffin.
I think the message that Gabby sent was a pretty good one actually. She was saying basically, “look I do a LOT of exercise. I rewarded myself with a special treat. This is not something I do every day five times a day.”
In other words her message is one of moderation! Not excess! And THAT is the best model there is!
So kudos to you Gabby! Keep it up.
As for you Mrs. Obama and all other liberals for that matter, Get the stink out of MY kitchen and diet. That is up to me. And If I cannot have that cheeseburger after my workout then maybe I will just not have the workout in the first place then where will we all be?
I thought I would watch for a couple of minutes and so I heard Jay Leno ask her what she ate after the Olympics and she replied that she had had an Egg McMuffin from McDonald’s.
Sitting right next to her though was apparently the first lady Michelle Obama who said “oh Gabby your hurting me here.” Referring to her drive to make all Americans eat healthier.
Gabby laughingly apologized and I thought, “wow I wouldn’t have done that.” I mean no disrespect to either of those people I saw but really come on.
I know that Gabby is a teenager who is being put into new situations that are beyond her experience and I know that MOST people would be a little awestruck to be hobnobbing with national movers and shakers. But I wish that she could have turned to the first lady and said something like…
“listen, I am a Gold Medal winner of the Olympics! I worked hard I trained hard and I did a VERY good job! I think after all the work and exercise and effort I made that I am entitled to enjoy ONE SINGLE EGG MCMUFFIN without you breathing down my neck about it.
“I am NOT over weight, I am NOT obese!”
“I am a healthy young girl who enjoys occasional treats like anyone else does and I am also pretty sure, that with my training regimen, tomorrow I will more than work off ANY calories that I might have gained by eating a fast food sandwich!”
“Besides which it is NOT your place to tell me what I can or cannot eat!”
Or to make that shorter… “You know what? Lay off! I EARNED IT!”
What I find even more disturbing about this is the fact that Mrs. Obama is very quick to tell all of us (including Olympic gold medal winners now, who know VERY well what kind of calorie consumption they can have) how to eat. Meantime EVERY SINGLE FOOD that she has deemed to be bad for all of us, she and her husband will gulp down as fast as they can.
For example, Every where that Michelle Obama has gone we see her eating Burgers, Fries, Onion Rings, Ice Cream, Milkshakes and so on.
When asked about her husband’s (or her) food preferences she mentioned, Guacamole, Onion Rings, Nacho chips and Burgers.
But she has decided that Gabby (ONCE more let me remind you, a girl who has just won several GOLD medals for her athleticism in the Olympics) cannot have an egg McMuffin.
I think the message that Gabby sent was a pretty good one actually. She was saying basically, “look I do a LOT of exercise. I rewarded myself with a special treat. This is not something I do every day five times a day.”
In other words her message is one of moderation! Not excess! And THAT is the best model there is!
So kudos to you Gabby! Keep it up.
As for you Mrs. Obama and all other liberals for that matter, Get the stink out of MY kitchen and diet. That is up to me. And If I cannot have that cheeseburger after my workout then maybe I will just not have the workout in the first place then where will we all be?
August 24, 2012
My carefully considered response to SCOTUS
I would like to make a point here for all those liberals who are SOOOO compassionate towards the poor and needy.
Did you hear the ruling by the Supreme Court on Obamacare? If so can you explain to me why it is that the decision on how the tax for people who do not carry health insurance is “$95 OR 1% whichever is higher”? let us all think about this.
IF they are willing to put a tax of $95 on something OR 1% “whichever is lower, then that means that they are willing to go at least as low as a $9,000.00 ANNUAL income. The federal poverty level for an individual is $15,000.00 a year.
That means that there has to be intent to apply this tax to people who are below the poverty tax level. The “poor people” who you are so insistent that you want to help with this plan are going to be penalized BY YOU.
Therefor I have determined that I want all of you to be quiet about how you “care so much for the poor” and “all this is for their benefit”. Clearly it isn’t and I am tired of listening to your lies and inconsistencies.
Clearly, WHATEVER you may say, you do not care for, or about, ANYONE at all. All you care about is your own self image and self opinion.
You want to be able to pat yourself on the back while you hurt the people you claim to be helping.
To ME that means… well what it means I cannot say because (1) I am not the kind of guy who uses words like that and (2) even if I were it would be inappropriate to say such things on a public venue such as this.
Suffice it to say that, IF you think this idea is a good one then you have lost ANY respect I might have been able to dig up for you to begin with and in some cases I find you to be no more than a contemptuous jerk.
Did you hear the ruling by the Supreme Court on Obamacare? If so can you explain to me why it is that the decision on how the tax for people who do not carry health insurance is “$95 OR 1% whichever is higher”? let us all think about this.
IF they are willing to put a tax of $95 on something OR 1% “whichever is lower, then that means that they are willing to go at least as low as a $9,000.00 ANNUAL income. The federal poverty level for an individual is $15,000.00 a year.
That means that there has to be intent to apply this tax to people who are below the poverty tax level. The “poor people” who you are so insistent that you want to help with this plan are going to be penalized BY YOU.
Therefor I have determined that I want all of you to be quiet about how you “care so much for the poor” and “all this is for their benefit”. Clearly it isn’t and I am tired of listening to your lies and inconsistencies.
Clearly, WHATEVER you may say, you do not care for, or about, ANYONE at all. All you care about is your own self image and self opinion.
You want to be able to pat yourself on the back while you hurt the people you claim to be helping.
To ME that means… well what it means I cannot say because (1) I am not the kind of guy who uses words like that and (2) even if I were it would be inappropriate to say such things on a public venue such as this.
Suffice it to say that, IF you think this idea is a good one then you have lost ANY respect I might have been able to dig up for you to begin with and in some cases I find you to be no more than a contemptuous jerk.
August 23, 2012
A different view… I will have to think about this one.
So one argument I heard, on this ACA verdict, was that the Supreme Court did not actually vote on the constitutionality of the law itself. They simply declared that the government cannot force people to buy things BUT the government CAN tax people and they can assess penalties IF they are actually taxes.
So the view is that the Government can tax period
They did not vote on the ACA law as a constitutional entity except for the point that the federal government cannot take away the Medicare assistance from states that decide they do not want to participate.
This means the declaration by Robert’s is gauged to remove the Supreme Court from the political machinations and not giving any power to either side for the upcoming elections. The problem with that view is that the Democrats are claiming that they have won because this means the law is constitutional.
If this was a commerce clause issue then this law would be unconstitutional, but the government can tax. So what we will all have to do is look very closely at what the Court has really said… in other words it is time to really start parsing the WAY they said it because of this.
You don’t HAVE to buy health care, if you choose to not buy it then you will have to pay a higher tax. If you DO choose to buy it then your taxes go down.
Someone has made the point that this was taxation without representation. Everyone wants to say no it isn’t, your congress passed this they are your representatives thus it is NOT taxation without representation, but the guy was insistent and he said, “NO wait think about this. It was passed as a bill with maybe a penalty or mandate as part of the commerce clause, but they insisted THIS IS NOT A TAX. So if they are now calling it a tax it is a tax placed on the voters WITHOUT the representatives getting the chance to vote on it AS A TAX.”
He may have a point.
I will have to think about it
So the view is that the Government can tax period
They did not vote on the ACA law as a constitutional entity except for the point that the federal government cannot take away the Medicare assistance from states that decide they do not want to participate.
This means the declaration by Robert’s is gauged to remove the Supreme Court from the political machinations and not giving any power to either side for the upcoming elections. The problem with that view is that the Democrats are claiming that they have won because this means the law is constitutional.
If this was a commerce clause issue then this law would be unconstitutional, but the government can tax. So what we will all have to do is look very closely at what the Court has really said… in other words it is time to really start parsing the WAY they said it because of this.
You don’t HAVE to buy health care, if you choose to not buy it then you will have to pay a higher tax. If you DO choose to buy it then your taxes go down.
Someone has made the point that this was taxation without representation. Everyone wants to say no it isn’t, your congress passed this they are your representatives thus it is NOT taxation without representation, but the guy was insistent and he said, “NO wait think about this. It was passed as a bill with maybe a penalty or mandate as part of the commerce clause, but they insisted THIS IS NOT A TAX. So if they are now calling it a tax it is a tax placed on the voters WITHOUT the representatives getting the chance to vote on it AS A TAX.”
He may have a point.
I will have to think about it
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)