The truth about taxes

[JoeNormal]

There are more than I would care to take the time to list here. But just a few are oppressive wage/hour laws, too high taxation with constant threats of even more taxes piled on top of that, unnecessary and unreasonable environmental requirements, barriers to development and expansion--think the Keystone Pipeline just for one. And the mandates associated with Obamacare are likely to be the largest killer of both businesses and jobs this country has ever seen.

The Keystone pipeline would be the biggest environmental disaster to befall this country even if it didn't spill a drop. And where do you think wages and hours would end up if left to a world market of starving slaves? I have some very marketable skills and I wouldn't even want to contemplate that one.

Well since I have worked and lived with many many such pipelines, without a single environmental disaster yet I simply can't agree with you on that one. Nor have I yet seen a robust economy and full employment produce any kind of market of starving slaves, world or otherwise. Do you exaggerate that much on everything? Or just on the subject of creating jobs for all who want them?

They're putting the final touches on the shutdown of the factory where I work. My position wasn't affect because I design things to be built - now they'll be built somewhere else. It was a sadder sight than I had imagined. 20,000 square feet that was filled with people and machinery was empty. I don't know what you do for a living but if you don't have skills that could be replicated by a machine or a slave, you'd better start to worry.

As for the XL Pipeline, as I suggested before, it's not a spill that I would worry about. Do you have any idea what it is that they're flowing through the pipe? Its a oil produced from gravel that's absorbed some hydrocarbons. It's barely worth refining but they're going to do it anyway because there's a buck to be made. It will require a huge release of CO2 to do it and the byproduct will be rich in heavy metals including lead and arsenic. Wherever the dispose of it, the groundwater will eventually be contaminated.

 

[JoeNormal]

Can you name one government program that is well managed? Just one.

I'll name two - Medicare and the VA Hospital.

Folks, this is simply an astounding display of profound ignorance. The dreadful conditions of the VA hosptials made nations news for months at one point. How [MENTION=37583]JoeNormal[/MENTION] could be this ignorant of national news simply defies belief...

Some Veterans' Hospitals in Shocking Shape - ABC News

Walter Reed Army Medical Center neglect scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

'It Is Just Not Walter Reed'

This what happens when a system is underfunded and over utilized. As I said before, you'd probably prefer that the people these facilities serve would have the decency to just shuffle off and die as quickly as possible.

 

[JoeNormal]

There are more than I would care to take the time to list here. But just a few are oppressive wage/hour laws, too high taxation with constant threats of even more taxes piled on top of that, unnecessary and unreasonable environmental requirements, barriers to development and expansion--think the Keystone Pipeline just for one. And the mandates associated with Obamacare are likely to be the largest killer of both businesses and jobs this country has ever seen.

The Keystone pipeline would be the biggest environmental disaster to befall this country even if it didn't spill a drop. And where do you think wages and hours would end up if left to a world market of starving slaves? I have some very marketable skills and I wouldn't even want to contemplate that one.

It's "disastrous" to safely funnel oil through a pipeline in your mind?

Any wonder Dumbocrat policy ends with collapse, poverty, and misery when people like this make up their base?

See post 541.

 

[JoeNormal]

There are more than I would care to take the time to list here. But just a few are oppressive wage/hour laws, too high taxation with constant threats of even more taxes piled on top of that, unnecessary and unreasonable environmental requirements, barriers to development and expansion--think the Keystone Pipeline just for one. And the mandates associated with Obamacare are likely to be the largest killer of both businesses and jobs this country has ever seen.

The Keystone pipeline would be the biggest environmental disaster to befall this country even if it didn't spill a drop. And where do you think wages and hours would end up if left to a world market of starving slaves? I have some very marketable skills and I wouldn't even want to contemplate that one.

you are really weird or really dumb. I don't yet know which. Do you have any idea how many miles of piplelines already exist in this country? Moving oil by pipeline is much saver than moving it by truck or train.

See post 541.

 

[JoeNormal]

I don't have time to look into medicare advantage right now but I suspect that if insurance companies are running it, they aren't dealing with the terminally ill or severely handicapped who should have the common decency to just shuffle off and die as quickly as possible.

Perfectly, beautifully, wonderfully 100% wrong.

Medicare Advantage plans have to take and serve all applicants regardless of health history or pre-existing conditions. They also add wonderful complimentary services such as health club memberships to keep seniors healthy, active and engaged. At least most of them do, a fine example of the creativity of free market competition.

Dang, my kingdom for some educated debate on this topic.

.

So far, you're the only one with any credibility who's said this. I'll look into it.

 

[P@triot]

I'll name two - Medicare and the VA Hospital.

Folks, this is simply an astounding display of profound ignorance. The dreadful conditions of the VA hosptials made nations news for months at one point. How [MENTION=37583]JoeNormal[/MENTION] could be this ignorant of national news simply defies belief...

Some Veterans' Hospitals in Shocking Shape - ABC News

Walter Reed Army Medical Center neglect scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

'It Is Just Not Walter Reed'

This what happens when a system is underfunded and over utilized. As I said before, you'd probably prefer that the people these facilities serve would have the decency to just shuffle off and die as quickly as possible.

No Joe - what I would prefer is that we end the unconstitutional, nightmare socialism that the idiot liberals support, so that we can properly care of the men and women who earned it through their service.

It's "underfunded" because assholes just like you support Obamacare - which costs $2 trillion. That's $2 trillion that could have gone to the VA.

How sad that you would rather see welfare queens on crack with 12 children from 11 different men get healthcare over our military men and women who risk their ass every day so you can sit on yours.

 

[P@triot]

I'll name two - Medicare and the VA Hospital.

Folks, this is simply an astounding display of profound ignorance. The dreadful conditions of the VA hosptials made nations news for months at one point. How [MENTION=37583]JoeNormal[/MENTION] could be this ignorant of national news simply defies belief...

Some Veterans' Hospitals in Shocking Shape - ABC News

Walter Reed Army Medical Center neglect scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

'It Is Just Not Walter Reed'

This what happens when a system is underfunded and over utilized. As I said before, you'd probably prefer that the people these facilities serve would have the decency to just shuffle off and die as quickly as possible.

By the way - why do you change the subject when proven wrong? You said the VA Hospitals was "well managed". I just proved it wasn't.

Be a big boy and admit your ignorance on the subject....

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't have time to look into medicare advantage right now but I suspect that if insurance companies are running it, they aren't dealing with the terminally ill or severely handicapped who should have the common decency to just shuffle off and die as quickly as possible.

Perfectly, beautifully, wonderfully 100% wrong.

Medicare Advantage plans have to take and serve all applicants regardless of health history or pre-existing conditions. They also add wonderful complimentary services such as health club memberships to keep seniors healthy, active and engaged. At least most of them do, a fine example of the creativity of free market competition.

Dang, my kingdom for some educated debate on this topic.

.

So far, you're the only one with any credibility who's said this. I'll look into it.

She's absolutely right. Medicare Advantage is the best thing that ever happened to Seniors. But the $700 billion Obama slashed from Medicare in order to fund Obamacare is hitting the Advantage Plans too. A lot of folks are losing their trusted doctors and important specialists and nearby hospitals. Premiums have sharply escalated, copays and deductibles have been doublled in many cases, and some benefits have been cancelled. But then Obama targeted the Advantage Plans that, though the most cost efficient medicare plans out there, they were providing more benefits than other programs were providing and that wasn't 'fair'.

God forbid that the government would look at what is working best and encourage that. No, we have to bring the efficient and effective down to the lowest common denominator to make it 'fair'. It is the most insane concept of modern American liberalism.

 

[JoeNormal]

Folks, this is simply an astounding display of profound ignorance. The dreadful conditions of the VA hosptials made nations news for months at one point. How [MENTION=37583]JoeNormal[/MENTION] could be this ignorant of national news simply defies belief...

Some Veterans' Hospitals in Shocking Shape - ABC News

Walter Reed Army Medical Center neglect scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

'It Is Just Not Walter Reed'

This what happens when a system is underfunded and over utilized. As I said before, you'd probably prefer that the people these facilities serve would have the decency to just shuffle off and die as quickly as possible.

No Joe - what I would prefer is that we end the unconstitutional, nightmare socialism that the idiot liberals support, so that we can properly care of the men and women who earned it through their service.

It's "underfunded" because assholes just like you support Obamacare - which costs $2 trillion. That's $2 trillion that could have gone to the VA in spite of funding issues.

How sad that you would rather see welfare queens on crack with 12 children from 11 different men get healthcare over our military men and women who risk their ass every day so you can sit on yours.

They're underfunded because Tea Party pieces of shit like you never saw a government program the didn't need to be defunded. My father-in-law received excellent care at our local VA in spite of funding issues.

Oh, and as for me sitting on my ass all day, I'm not the one who seems to live on this site. Natural mistake for an ultra-right-winger though. You can't imagine anyone standing for a principle that doesn't immediately affect oneself.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Folks, this is simply an astounding display of profound ignorance. The dreadful conditions of the VA hosptials made nations news for months at one point. How [MENTION=37583]JoeNormal[/MENTION] could be this ignorant of national news simply defies belief...

Some Veterans' Hospitals in Shocking Shape - ABC News

Walter Reed Army Medical Center neglect scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

'It Is Just Not Walter Reed'

This what happens when a system is underfunded and over utilized. As I said before, you'd probably prefer that the people these facilities serve would have the decency to just shuffle off and die as quickly as possible.

By the way - why do you change the subject when proven wrong? You said the VA Hospitals was "well managed". I just proved it wasn't.

Be a big boy and admit your ignorance on the subject....

He will much rather look to try and blame the GOP than admit the government can't manage anything well. The information you provided is nothing really new, as veterans and the military suffer from cuts whenever a Democrat holds the office of the executive branch. I have heard about these problems with the VA hospitals when Clinton was in office, as the military is always the first funding to get cut. Why else would you find a majority of those serving in the armed forces to be in support of Republican candidates for President?

 

[Foxfyre]

The Keystone pipeline would be the biggest environmental disaster to befall this country even if it didn't spill a drop. And where do you think wages and hours would end up if left to a world market of starving slaves? I have some very marketable skills and I wouldn't even want to contemplate that one.

Well since I have worked and lived with many many such pipelines, without a single environmental disaster yet I simply can't agree with you on that one. Nor have I yet seen a robust economy and full employment produce any kind of market of starving slaves, world or otherwise. Do you exaggerate that much on everything? Or just on the subject of creating jobs for all who want them?

They're putting the final touches on the shutdown of the factory where I work. My position wasn't affect because I design things to be built - now they'll be built somewhere else. It was a sadder sight than I had imagined. 20,000 square feet that was filled with people and machinery was empty. I don't know what you do for a living but if you don't have skills that could be replicated by a machine or a slave, you'd better start to worry.

As for the XL Pipeline, as I suggested before, it's not a spill that I would worry about. Do you have any idea what it is that they're flowing through the pipe? Its a oil produced from gravel that's absorbed some hydrocarbons. It's barely worth refining but they're going to do it anyway because there's a buck to be made. It will require a huge release of CO2 to do it and the byproduct will be rich in heavy metals including lead and arsenic. Wherever the dispose of it, the groundwater will eventually be contaminated.

The last I read, confirmed by my up close and personal expert in oil refining, the process to refine the tar sands oil will require about 12% more energy than refining the light crude that comes from say the Permian Basin. But we have enough environmental controls on the process that it will in no way be an environmental problem, let alone a disaster. Canada is finding oil prices at a current level that makes extracting and refining the product to be profitable. It will happen whether or not we build the pipeline. And if we do not build the pipeline, the product will be shipped by rail, truck, or on the high seas which is much more of an environmental hazard than the pipeline will be.

We should be encouraging and improving private sector commerce and industry and encouraging the entire world to look to private enterprise and free markets to lift the standards of living. More and more taxation and more and more government control sure as hell isn't accomplishing that.

 

[Londoner]

During the postwar years, wages were much higher and health/retirement benefits were incredible. The American worker had enough skin in the game to pay taxes and still survive.

But the Reagan/Thatcher model claimed that high wages/benefits stunted economic growth, and that we needed to lower the cost of production to incentivize investment, innovation and economic growth.

So we spent the last 30 years moving production to cheaper labor markets in freedom-hating, tyrannical nations like Communist China. (The relationship between capitalist investors and communist labor is nicely juxtaposed w/ tired talking points about freedom, a contradiction the cut and paste Rottweiler doesn't see.)

Now the largest employer, Walmart, barely pays enough for families to survive, and the benefits for the majority of workers are non-existent. Walmart famously has food drives for their employees during the Holidays because many of their workers barely make enough to buy food. (Meaning: it's hard to squeeze tax revenue from a population of low wage workers who don't make enough money to survive, much less put their children through school or give their families any kind of heath care)

The upside of the new low wage/no benefit economy is that owners & investors have realized unprecedented wealth - they have enough money to fund elections and staff government, which translates into the most concentrated power that the West has seen since the old Feudal monarchies. If you don't believe me, research the number of election that the Koch brothers - just 2 men - have been able to influence. If a politician doesn't vote correctly, he gets removed in the next primary. Period.

Here is the point: as a consequence of the new low wage/no benefit economy, the working class does not have the income to contribute effectively to the tax base.

This is exactly the kind of tax revenue problem that the opponents of Supply Side economics predicted. They said that we would end up with a concentrated pool of dynastic wealth on one side surrounded by growing hordes of wage serfs who not only lacked the capacity pay taxes, but who would also require massive amounts of debt to buy things and survive.

The following is what well-meaning people like Rottweiler don't understand.
Ultimately, it was predicted that the low wage serfs would amass so much debt in the aggregate that they would eventually lose the capacity to consume at the needed level to sustain economic growth. And when this tipping point was reached, it was predicted, the economy would slide into terminal stagnation. You would have massive investment capital stuck on top sitting side by side with a huge unemployed or under-employed workforce, but with no way to combine the two (because the capitalist has no incentive to invest when consumers lack the purchasing power in the aggregate to buy what they produce). Furthermore, it was predicted, that when we reached this stagnant phase, the economy would have to manufacture bubbles (e.g., tech, housing) so that the surplus capital could be re-invested into "growth" vehicles. The result of increasingly bubble'izing the economy, it was predicted, would result in a bubble so big that its bursting would bring long term damage to the economy (2008 Financial Meltdown).

Welcome to the downside of Voodoo Economics. When the money fails to trickle down to the pockets of average consumers, than the result is the death of consumer demand and the destruction of the economy. But it gets worse. If you try to "fix" this demand problem with credit (as we have been doing since 1980), than you are going to make the original demand problem 1,000x worse - and the overall damage could quite literally destroy the nation faster and more completely than any number of nuclear bombs.

Summary - the United States of America swallowed poison in 1980; it bankrupted its "consumer base" to give investment capital cheaper operating costs. But to answer Rottweiler concern about taxes. If you want more revenue from the working class, than you need to give a larger portion of the workforce more than subsistence wages. You can't squeeze water from a stone. Actually, because your side destroyed this nation with voodoo economics, you probably do believe that you can get something from nothing.

Okay . . . now go back to your cut and paste propaganda.

 

[Foxfyre]

I believer Rottweiler does understand that the rich getting richer is not what makes the poor more poor. I believe Rottweiler does understand is that you cannot help the poor by making the rich less rich. In fact you will invariably hurt the poor and dig them deeper into poverty every time you try that.

 

[P@triot]

This what happens when a system is underfunded and over utilized. As I said before, you'd probably prefer that the people these facilities serve would have the decency to just shuffle off and die as quickly as possible.

No Joe - what I would prefer is that we end the unconstitutional, nightmare socialism that the idiot liberals support, so that we can properly care of the men and women who earned it through their service.

It's "underfunded" because assholes just like you support Obamacare - which costs $2 trillion. That's $2 trillion that could have gone to the VA in spite of funding issues.

How sad that you would rather see welfare queens on crack with 12 children from 11 different men get healthcare over our military men and women who risk their ass every day so you can sit on yours.

They're underfunded because Tea Party pieces of shit like you never saw a government program the didn't need to be defunded. My father-in-law received excellent care at our local VA in spite of funding issues.

Oh, and as for me sitting on my ass all day, I'm not the one who seems to live on this site. Natural mistake for an ultra-right-winger though. You can't imagine anyone standing for a principle that doesn't immediately affect oneself.

"Principle"? Is that the new Dumbocrat code-word for communism? Here's the simple truth - if you A.) actually had a job and B.) actually gave a shit about people as you claim, you would simply direct your own money where you wanted it to go - rather than demanding that government direct other people's money.

The fact is, it's fuck'n asshole Dumbocrats like you who have ensured our men and women in the military get fucked over royally while government redirects money to greedy, lazy, worthless parasites like you.

 

[P@triot]

This what happens when a system is underfunded and over utilized. As I said before, you'd probably prefer that the people these facilities serve would have the decency to just shuffle off and die as quickly as possible.

By the way - why do you change the subject when proven wrong? You said the VA Hospitals was "well managed". I just proved it wasn't.

Be a big boy and admit your ignorance on the subject....

He will much rather look to try and blame the GOP than admit the government can't manage anything well. The information you provided is nothing really new, as veterans and the military suffer from cuts whenever a Democrat holds the office of the executive branch. I have heard about these problems with the VA hospitals when Clinton was in office, as the military is always the first funding to get cut. Why else would you find a majority of those serving in the armed forces to be in support of Republican candidates for President?

Exactly my point - these useless Dumbocrats like Clinton and Obama want to reward parasites (in exchange for power over them) at the expense of those who earn - such as those that serve, those that produce, etc.

 

[P@triot]

Well since I have worked and lived with many many such pipelines, without a single environmental disaster yet I simply can't agree with you on that one. Nor have I yet seen a robust economy and full employment produce any kind of market of starving slaves, world or otherwise. Do you exaggerate that much on everything? Or just on the subject of creating jobs for all who want them?

They're putting the final touches on the shutdown of the factory where I work. My position wasn't affect because I design things to be built - now they'll be built somewhere else. It was a sadder sight than I had imagined. 20,000 square feet that was filled with people and machinery was empty. I don't know what you do for a living but if you don't have skills that could be replicated by a machine or a slave, you'd better start to worry.

As for the XL Pipeline, as I suggested before, it's not a spill that I would worry about. Do you have any idea what it is that they're flowing through the pipe? Its a oil produced from gravel that's absorbed some hydrocarbons. It's barely worth refining but they're going to do it anyway because there's a buck to be made. It will require a huge release of CO2 to do it and the byproduct will be rich in heavy metals including lead and arsenic. Wherever the dispose of it, the groundwater will eventually be contaminated.

The last I read, confirmed by my up close and personal expert in oil refining, the process to refine the tar sands oil will require about 12% more energy than refining the light crude that comes from say the Permian Basin. But we have enough environmental controls on the process that it will in no way be an environmental problem, let alone a disaster. Canada is finding oil prices at a current level that makes extracting and refining the product to be profitable. It will happen whether or not we build the pipeline. And if we do not build the pipeline, the product will be shipped by rail, truck, or on the high seas which is much more of an environmental hazard than the pipeline will be.

We should be encouraging and improving private sector commerce and industry and encouraging the entire world to look to private enterprise and free markets to lift the standards of living. More and more taxation and more and more government control sure as hell isn't accomplishing that.

Shhh! You're talking facts and rational thought. Don't you know that will make the head burst of a Dumbocrat like Joe?

 

[P@triot]

During the postwar years, wages were much higher and health/retirement benefits were incredible. The American worker had enough skin in the game to pay taxes and still survive.

But the Reagan/Thatcher model claimed that high wages/benefits stunted economic growth, and that we needed to lower the cost of production to incentivize investment, innovation and economic growth.

So we spent the last 30 years moving production to cheaper labor markets in freedom-hating, tyrannical nations like Communist China. (The relationship between capitalist investors and communist labor is nicely juxtaposed w/ tired talking points about freedom, a contradiction the cut and paste Rottweiler doesn't see.)

Now the largest employer, Walmart, barely pays enough for families to survive, and the benefits for the majority of workers are non-existent. Walmart famously has food drives for their employees during the Holidays because many of their workers barely make enough to buy food. (Meaning: it's hard to squeeze tax revenue from a population of low wage workers who don't make enough money to survive, much less put their children through school or give their families any kind of heath care)

The upside of the new low wage/no benefit economy is that owners & investors have realized unprecedented wealth - they have enough money to fund elections and staff government, which translates into the most concentrated power that the West has seen since the old Feudal monarchies. If you don't believe me, research the number of election that the Koch brothers - just 2 men - have been able to influence. If a politician doesn't vote correctly, he gets removed in the next primary. Period.

Here is the point: as a consequence of the new low wage/no benefit economy, the working class does not have the income to contribute effectively to the tax base.

This is exactly the kind of tax revenue problem that the opponents of Supply Side economics predicted. They said that we would end up with a concentrated pool of dynastic wealth on one side surrounded by growing hordes of wage serfs who not only lacked the capacity pay taxes, but who would also require massive amounts of debt to buy things and survive.

The following is what well-meaning people like Rottweiler don't understand.
Ultimately, it was predicted that the low wage serfs would amass so much debt in the aggregate that they would eventually lose the capacity to consume at the needed level to sustain economic growth. And when this tipping point was reached, it was predicted, the economy would slide into terminal stagnation. You would have massive investment capital stuck on top sitting side by side with a huge unemployed or under-employed workforce, but with no way to combine the two (because the capitalist has no incentive to invest when consumers lack the purchasing power in the aggregate to buy what they produce). Furthermore, it was predicted, that when we reached this stagnant phase, the economy would have to manufacture bubbles (e.g., tech, housing) so that the surplus capital could be re-invested into "growth" vehicles. The result of increasingly bubble'izing the economy, it was predicted, would result in a bubble so big that its bursting would bring long term damage to the economy (2008 Financial Meltdown).

Welcome to the downside of Voodoo Economics. When the money fails to trickle down to the pockets of average consumers, than the result is the death of consumer demand and the destruction of the economy. But it gets worse. If you try to "fix" this demand problem with credit (as we have been doing since 1980), than you are going to make the original demand problem 1,000x worse - and the overall damage could quite literally destroy the nation faster and more completely than any number of nuclear bombs.

Summary - the United States of America swallowed poison in 1980; it bankrupted its "consumer base" to give investment capital cheaper operating costs. But to answer Rottweiler concern about taxes. If you want more revenue from the working class, than you need to give a larger portion of the workforce more than subsistence wages. You can't squeeze water from a stone. Actually, because your side destroyed this nation with voodoo economics, you probably do believe that you can get something from nothing.

Okay . . . now go back to your cut and paste propaganda.

Oh the irony here.... the idiot known as [MENTION=24221]Londoner[/MENTION] literally just cut & paste an entire post (sans his aside about me) from ThinkProgress while accusing me of "cut and paste"!

Here's something that is not cut & paste Londoner. Lets see if you can follow along here. Now, this only requires the intelligence and common sense of the average 2nd grader, so this might be a big challenge for you. But if you can't follow along, ask a friend or grown up for help - ok?

Would any business (I repeat, would any business) in U.S. history move their operations overseas if it were cheaper to keep their operations here in the U.S.? To dumb this down to your level, would company X move their operations to China if it cost them $1 a year for their operations to be here in the U.S. and $20 per year in China?

The answer - of course - is no. There is only one side to blame for the loss of jobs. The Dumbocrat spread-the-wealth communists who have created the highest corporate tax rate in the world (fact) and who have created despicable, bloated union salaries via extortion (fact).

As always, as it has world-wide for over 100 years now, Dumbocrat policy creates bankruptcy, poverty, failure, and collapse. And then they stand around scratching their head and looking for the Dumbocrat masters (such as George Soros) to tell them who is to blame and what the next step is...

Now quick, go search ThinkProgress for a cut & paste response to my dumbed-down-just-for-you, basic, common sense, 2nd grade level, obvious, indisputable facts for which you are left stupefied by and with no response for... Oh, nad be sure the article uses "big" words like "juxtaposed" so you can make yourself believe others view you as "enlightened"...

 

[JoeNormal]

I don't have time to look into medicare advantage right now but I suspect that if insurance companies are running it, they aren't dealing with the terminally ill or severely handicapped who should have the common decency to just shuffle off and die as quickly as possible.

Perfectly, beautifully, wonderfully 100% wrong.

Medicare Advantage plans have to take and serve all applicants regardless of health history or pre-existing conditions. They also add wonderful complimentary services such as health club memberships to keep seniors healthy, active and engaged. At least most of them do, a fine example of the creativity of free market competition.

Dang, my kingdom for some educated debate on this topic.

.

So far, you're the only one with any credibility who's said this. I'll look into it.

Ok, so I did a web search and all roads seem to lead to the Medicare.gov site. From there, I could not find the magic page that explained what is better about Medicare Advantage. Since I'm not old enough to qualify and have no family members currently in the system, I'm wont to spend a whole bunch of time trying to determine the 'advantage'. Maybe you can tell me in you own words why it's better.

 

[JoeNormal]

Folks, this is simply an astounding display of profound ignorance. The dreadful conditions of the VA hosptials made nations news for months at one point. How [MENTION=37583]JoeNormal[/MENTION] could be this ignorant of national news simply defies belief...

Some Veterans' Hospitals in Shocking Shape - ABC News

Walter Reed Army Medical Center neglect scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

'It Is Just Not Walter Reed'

This what happens when a system is underfunded and over utilized. As I said before, you'd probably prefer that the people these facilities serve would have the decency to just shuffle off and die as quickly as possible.

By the way - why do you change the subject when proven wrong? You said the VA Hospitals was "well managed". I just proved it wasn't.

Be a big boy and admit your ignorance on the subject....

How did I change the subject? You do realize that part of managing is doing the best you can with what you've got to work with don't you?

 

[JoeNormal]

Well since I have worked and lived with many many such pipelines, without a single environmental disaster yet I simply can't agree with you on that one. Nor have I yet seen a robust economy and full employment produce any kind of market of starving slaves, world or otherwise. Do you exaggerate that much on everything? Or just on the subject of creating jobs for all who want them?

They're putting the final touches on the shutdown of the factory where I work. My position wasn't affect because I design things to be built - now they'll be built somewhere else. It was a sadder sight than I had imagined. 20,000 square feet that was filled with people and machinery was empty. I don't know what you do for a living but if you don't have skills that could be replicated by a machine or a slave, you'd better start to worry.

As for the XL Pipeline, as I suggested before, it's not a spill that I would worry about. Do you have any idea what it is that they're flowing through the pipe? Its a oil produced from gravel that's absorbed some hydrocarbons. It's barely worth refining but they're going to do it anyway because there's a buck to be made. It will require a huge release of CO2 to do it and the byproduct will be rich in heavy metals including lead and arsenic. Wherever the dispose of it, the groundwater will eventually be contaminated.

The last I read, confirmed by my up close and personal expert in oil refining, the process to refine the tar sands oil will require about 12% more energy than refining the light crude that comes from say the Permian Basin. But we have enough environmental controls on the process that it will in no way be an environmental problem, let alone a disaster. Canada is finding oil prices at a current level that makes extracting and refining the product to be profitable. It will happen whether or not we build the pipeline. And if we do not build the pipeline, the product will be shipped by rail, truck, or on the high seas which is much more of an environmental hazard than the pipeline will be.

We should be encouraging and improving private sector commerce and industry and encouraging the entire world to look to private enterprise and free markets to lift the standards of living. More and more taxation and more and more government control sure as hell isn't accomplishing that.

Last I heard it was over 20%. They'll continue to refine whether or not the pipeline is there but not in nearly the quantities the would without it.