82.6% of uninsured Texans are from working family's. I think this is a debate you do not want to have ApacheM. No matter how you spin it the health care situation in Texas is not good.
82.6% of uninsured Texans are from working family's. I think this is a debate you do not want to have ApacheM. No matter how you spin it the health care situation in Texas is not good.
82.6% of uninsured Texans are from working family's. I think this is a debate you do not want to have ApacheM. No matter how you spin it the health care situation in Texas is not good.
Nowhere does it say you MUST have insurance. That is your choice. If you want to be a vegan, that's fine with me. If you
want to be gay, that's OK by me. Forcing people to have healthcare is unconstitutional, same as forcing people to pay more than their share to pay for it .
In case you forgot, this is suppose to be a FREE COUNTRY wher people are allowed to make thier own choices. What gives you or anyone else the right to make the decisions for them?
Stupid cannot be fixed!!!! But to each his own, live and let live. And stay the HELL outta my life. I'll make my own decisions.
82.6% of uninsured Texans are from working family's. I think this is a debate you do not want to have ApacheM. No matter how you spin it the health care situation in Texas is not good.
Nowhere does it say you MUST have insurance. That is your choice. If you want to be a vegan, that's fine with me. If you
want to be gay, that's OK by me. Forcing people to have healthcare is unconstitutional, same as forcing people to pay more than their share to pay for it .
In case you forgot, this is suppose to be a FREE COUNTRY wher people are allowed to make thier own choices. What gives you or anyone else the right to make the decisions for them?
Stupid cannot be fixed!!!! But to each his own, live and let live. And stay the HELL outta my life. I'll make my own decisions.
Yes however i doubt your position is that 25% of the population in Texas do not want an insurance?
Many would life an insurance if they could afford, but many have to chose between roof and food over their heads for them and their family's or health care.
0
Yes however i doubt your position is that 25% of the population in Texas do not want an insurance?
Many would life an insurance if they could afford, but many have to chose between roof and food over their heads for them and their family's or health care.
By the way, I just read that after a 20yr Study, 43% of Americans will be OBESE in 9yrs. Sounds like there's plenty of food .
You might want to read this again.
Go hungry means food insecurity.
What do hunger and food insecurity mean in the United States? Very
simply, hunger is defined as the uneasy or painful sensation caused by
lack of food. When we talk about hunger in America, we refer to the
ability of people to obtain sufficient food for their household. Some
people may find themselves skipping meals or cutting back on the
quality or quantity of food they purchase at the stores. This recurring
and involuntary lack of access to food can lead to malnutrition over
time.
0
Quote Originally Posted by ApacheM:
By the way, I just read that after a 20yr Study, 43% of Americans will be OBESE in 9yrs. Sounds like there's plenty of food .
You might want to read this again.
Go hungry means food insecurity.
What do hunger and food insecurity mean in the United States? Very
simply, hunger is defined as the uneasy or painful sensation caused by
lack of food. When we talk about hunger in America, we refer to the
ability of people to obtain sufficient food for their household. Some
people may find themselves skipping meals or cutting back on the
quality or quantity of food they purchase at the stores. This recurring
and involuntary lack of access to food can lead to malnutrition over
time.
The state needs to be a reliable mediator for its citizens and
secure a level playing field. That is why social liberalism works well. ------------- mikael - we have this in droves and its all failed
govt subsidizes college loans and now an avg state school runs 15k+ a year
govt subsidizes or pays farmers not to grow crop - bread is $3 a loaf, milk is $3 a gallon
social liberalism is no different than marxism or collectivism.
you are merely growing the group of receivers and punishing the producers. what happens when the producers stop producing?
0
The state needs to be a reliable mediator for its citizens and
secure a level playing field. That is why social liberalism works well. ------------- mikael - we have this in droves and its all failed
govt subsidizes college loans and now an avg state school runs 15k+ a year
govt subsidizes or pays farmers not to grow crop - bread is $3 a loaf, milk is $3 a gallon
social liberalism is no different than marxism or collectivism.
you are merely growing the group of receivers and punishing the producers. what happens when the producers stop producing?
I agree with some of your solutions but it does not solve the problems. You say no jobs, nothing must be given out on your taxpayer money. However you are already paying to all of that right now with the flawed system. So why not try to fix it?
which solutions do you agree with?? i don't say no jobs, i said go find a job that people need done. paying people to shuffle paper work just so they get a pay check is even worse than welfare.
and yes i am already paying for this shit in this flawed system. your idea of fixing it, however, is throwing more money at the problem like usual...
0
I agree with some of your solutions but it does not solve the problems. You say no jobs, nothing must be given out on your taxpayer money. However you are already paying to all of that right now with the flawed system. So why not try to fix it?
which solutions do you agree with?? i don't say no jobs, i said go find a job that people need done. paying people to shuffle paper work just so they get a pay check is even worse than welfare.
and yes i am already paying for this shit in this flawed system. your idea of fixing it, however, is throwing more money at the problem like usual...
You say you want lower taxes on everyone. Well let me ask you this a
lower tax of nothing or very little, how will that make people afford
food, health care ect?
i'm not even sure what this means... but if my guess is correct... lower taxes will leave people with more money from their JOB and they will have more money to buy food, healthcare, etc.
0
You say you want lower taxes on everyone. Well let me ask you this a
lower tax of nothing or very little, how will that make people afford
food, health care ect?
i'm not even sure what this means... but if my guess is correct... lower taxes will leave people with more money from their JOB and they will have more money to buy food, healthcare, etc.
All you republicans base your solutions out of everyone have money and
just lower taxes then every might be fine. NOT WORKING. If a person
only earns 20.000 dollars, lowering the persons tax a bit will not make
a difference in their lives when they other costs are not lowered
(which they are not due to the profit driven and flawed system you have
there).
what do you mean NOT WORKING??? this hasn't been tried since i've been ALIVE.
a person who makes only 20k doesnt pay shit in taxes anyway. they pay nothing or borderline nothing. costs will go down when people don't have to pay as many taxes. if i have to pay 40% taxes, that means i have to make 40% more money to make the amount of money i want/desire/need. this makes me raise my cost of goods... if i don't lower my prices because i am greedy, another company will set up shop and do what i do for cheaper...
0
All you republicans base your solutions out of everyone have money and
just lower taxes then every might be fine. NOT WORKING. If a person
only earns 20.000 dollars, lowering the persons tax a bit will not make
a difference in their lives when they other costs are not lowered
(which they are not due to the profit driven and flawed system you have
there).
what do you mean NOT WORKING??? this hasn't been tried since i've been ALIVE.
a person who makes only 20k doesnt pay shit in taxes anyway. they pay nothing or borderline nothing. costs will go down when people don't have to pay as many taxes. if i have to pay 40% taxes, that means i have to make 40% more money to make the amount of money i want/desire/need. this makes me raise my cost of goods... if i don't lower my prices because i am greedy, another company will set up shop and do what i do for cheaper...
The state needs to be a reliable mediator for its citizens and secure a
level playing field. That is why social liberalism works well.
this is why we have a bill of rights and equal opportunities for everybody. this is why affirmative action doesnt and will never work. level playing field means equal opportunity, it doesnt mean equal status or results
0
The state needs to be a reliable mediator for its citizens and secure a
level playing field. That is why social liberalism works well.
this is why we have a bill of rights and equal opportunities for everybody. this is why affirmative action doesnt and will never work. level playing field means equal opportunity, it doesnt mean equal status or results
The number is in the range of 49-50 million and therefore borderline 6-7. Some sites say 6, others say 7.
math must not be one of your fortes... i mean as little disrespect as possible when i say this... but i think you think the way you do because you have actually no idea how the real world works (at least in America)
0
The number is in the range of 49-50 million and therefore borderline 6-7. Some sites say 6, others say 7.
math must not be one of your fortes... i mean as little disrespect as possible when i say this... but i think you think the way you do because you have actually no idea how the real world works (at least in America)
i can never understand why all the liberals want to tax people who make hundreds of thousands of dollars out the ass.
it is punishing success. the more money you make (making money is supposed to be a good thing, remember?), the more you get taxed (taken) from you. it just doesnt make any sense unless you think its not fair/right/reasonable to have that much money.
0
i can never understand why all the liberals want to tax people who make hundreds of thousands of dollars out the ass.
it is punishing success. the more money you make (making money is supposed to be a good thing, remember?), the more you get taxed (taken) from you. it just doesnt make any sense unless you think its not fair/right/reasonable to have that much money.
I agree with some of your solutions but it does not solve the problems. You say no jobs, nothing must be given out on your taxpayer money. However you are already paying to all of that right now with the flawed system. So why not try to fix it?
You say you want lower taxes on everyone. Well let me ask you this a lower tax of nothing or very little, how will that make people afford food, health care ect?
All you republicans base your solutions out of everyone have money and just lower taxes then every might be fine. NOT WORKING. If a person only earns 20.000 dollars, lowering the persons tax a bit will not make a difference in their lives when they other costs are not lowered (which they are not due to the profit driven and flawed system you have there).
The state needs to be a reliable mediator for its citizens and secure a level playing field. That is why social liberalism works well.
Slim
The number is in the range of 49-50 million and therefore borderline 6-7. Some sites say 6, others say 7.
Rooster010
Same shit in EU. There they also stock up food, might as well just give it away to people in Africa who really struggle when their crop fail every now and then.
ApacheM
You might want to reverse that statement.
Go hungry means food insecurity.
What do hunger and food insecurity mean in the United States? Very simply, hunger is defined as the uneasy or painful sensation caused by lack of food. When we talk about hunger in America, we refer to the ability of people to obtain sufficient food for their household. Some people may find themselves skipping meals or cutting back on the quality or quantity of food they purchase at the stores. This recurring and involuntary lack of access to food can lead to malnutrition over time.
Add to that 25% of the population of Taxas has no health insurance.
How does raising the cost of doing business by raising taxes help lower the end cost of goods and services for lower and middle class families?
0
Quote Originally Posted by Mikael99:
William Wallace
I agree with some of your solutions but it does not solve the problems. You say no jobs, nothing must be given out on your taxpayer money. However you are already paying to all of that right now with the flawed system. So why not try to fix it?
You say you want lower taxes on everyone. Well let me ask you this a lower tax of nothing or very little, how will that make people afford food, health care ect?
All you republicans base your solutions out of everyone have money and just lower taxes then every might be fine. NOT WORKING. If a person only earns 20.000 dollars, lowering the persons tax a bit will not make a difference in their lives when they other costs are not lowered (which they are not due to the profit driven and flawed system you have there).
The state needs to be a reliable mediator for its citizens and secure a level playing field. That is why social liberalism works well.
Slim
The number is in the range of 49-50 million and therefore borderline 6-7. Some sites say 6, others say 7.
Rooster010
Same shit in EU. There they also stock up food, might as well just give it away to people in Africa who really struggle when their crop fail every now and then.
ApacheM
You might want to reverse that statement.
Go hungry means food insecurity.
What do hunger and food insecurity mean in the United States? Very simply, hunger is defined as the uneasy or painful sensation caused by lack of food. When we talk about hunger in America, we refer to the ability of people to obtain sufficient food for their household. Some people may find themselves skipping meals or cutting back on the quality or quantity of food they purchase at the stores. This recurring and involuntary lack of access to food can lead to malnutrition over time.
Add to that 25% of the population of Taxas has no health insurance.
How does raising the cost of doing business by raising taxes help lower the end cost of goods and services for lower and middle class families?
yea, he wants to raise taxes on business owners and others making 200K+, then he wants to raise the minimum wage, and then he expects costs to go down...
0
yea, he wants to raise taxes on business owners and others making 200K+, then he wants to raise the minimum wage, and then he expects costs to go down...
That is what happens folks when the right wing republiklan party are in power.
You are a dumbass. The dems have the white house, congress, and the house. You libtards have no one to blame but yourselfs, but please don't let that stop you from crying "Bush's fault" and "racist" because, as we all know, that's all you have left.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Mikael99:
That is what happens folks when the right wing republiklan party are in power.
You are a dumbass. The dems have the white house, congress, and the house. You libtards have no one to blame but yourselfs, but please don't let that stop you from crying "Bush's fault" and "racist" because, as we all know, that's all you have left.
i can never understand why all the liberals want to tax people who make hundreds of thousands of dollars out the ass.
it is punishing success. the more money you make (making money is supposed to be a good thing, remember?), the more you get taxed (taken) from you. it just doesnt make any sense unless you think its not fair/right/reasonable to have that much money.
Its because social liberals believe that if a person makes more money then them, they should be allowed to take the other persons money so everybody has the same equal share, even thou the liberals didnt go out and earn theirs. I truly dont understand how anybody can believe in this kind of crap.
0
Quote Originally Posted by williamwallace:
i can never understand why all the liberals want to tax people who make hundreds of thousands of dollars out the ass.
it is punishing success. the more money you make (making money is supposed to be a good thing, remember?), the more you get taxed (taken) from you. it just doesnt make any sense unless you think its not fair/right/reasonable to have that much money.
Its because social liberals believe that if a person makes more money then them, they should be allowed to take the other persons money so everybody has the same equal share, even thou the liberals didnt go out and earn theirs. I truly dont understand how anybody can believe in this kind of crap.
the article clearly states one out of seven, not that it makes a huge difference. st
A) i would impose tarrifs that require certain things to be taxed when imported into this country so that the jobs would not be shipped overseas just so the CEO can make more money while improving the economy overseas but destroying it here. of course this would impose problems as our prices of goods would go up but more people would have money to spend on said goods.
B) ALL illegals immediately booted out of the country. you can come back but you are going to do so legally. put our troops on the border...
C) impose a flat income tax on everybody whether you make 15 thousand or 15 million. i dont know the math but i would think a flat 30% income tax from everybody should do it i would think.
D) i suppose you could 'expand' the food stamp program. but by expand i mean contract. no more buying junk shit food or anything of the sort. only natural food thats good for you. two birds, one stone. obesity and foodstamp/welfare costs. (maybe youve never seen people use food stamps but they buy pop-tarts and fruit roll-ups, and then pull out cash to buy ciggarettes. and you wanna expand this program...
E) if you want to go on welfare then you are going to live significantly differently than everyone else. you are not going to decide where you live or what you eat. you are not going to have cash to spend.
0
Quote Originally Posted by williamwallace:
the article clearly states one out of seven, not that it makes a huge difference. st
A) i would impose tarrifs that require certain things to be taxed when imported into this country so that the jobs would not be shipped overseas just so the CEO can make more money while improving the economy overseas but destroying it here. of course this would impose problems as our prices of goods would go up but more people would have money to spend on said goods.
B) ALL illegals immediately booted out of the country. you can come back but you are going to do so legally. put our troops on the border...
C) impose a flat income tax on everybody whether you make 15 thousand or 15 million. i dont know the math but i would think a flat 30% income tax from everybody should do it i would think.
D) i suppose you could 'expand' the food stamp program. but by expand i mean contract. no more buying junk shit food or anything of the sort. only natural food thats good for you. two birds, one stone. obesity and foodstamp/welfare costs. (maybe youve never seen people use food stamps but they buy pop-tarts and fruit roll-ups, and then pull out cash to buy ciggarettes. and you wanna expand this program...
E) if you want to go on welfare then you are going to live significantly differently than everyone else. you are not going to decide where you live or what you eat. you are not going to have cash to spend.
I agree with some of your solutions but it does not solve the problems. You say no jobs, nothing must be given out on your taxpayer money. However you are already paying to all of that right now with the flawed system. So why not try to fix it?
which solutions do you agree with?? i don't say no jobs, i said go find a job that people need done. paying people to shuffle paper work just so they get a pay check is even worse than welfare.
and yes i am already paying for this shit in this flawed system. your idea of fixing it, however, is throwing more money at the problem like usual...
I agree with you that the goverment could put some limitations on their programs. Like you say if you are on foodstamps, you should not be able to go down and get 90% unhealthy food and 10% healthy.
I am for tight border control and no access for illigual immigrants. I feel the same about those things here in Denmark.
In regards for those who seek social security programs, you could mandate some job searching /education demands connected to it.
But the other extreme things you believe i do not agree with it. I believe the state should have a role, you do not.
I believe health care is a right for all, you do not.
0
Quote Originally Posted by williamwallace:
I agree with some of your solutions but it does not solve the problems. You say no jobs, nothing must be given out on your taxpayer money. However you are already paying to all of that right now with the flawed system. So why not try to fix it?
which solutions do you agree with?? i don't say no jobs, i said go find a job that people need done. paying people to shuffle paper work just so they get a pay check is even worse than welfare.
and yes i am already paying for this shit in this flawed system. your idea of fixing it, however, is throwing more money at the problem like usual...
I agree with you that the goverment could put some limitations on their programs. Like you say if you are on foodstamps, you should not be able to go down and get 90% unhealthy food and 10% healthy.
I am for tight border control and no access for illigual immigrants. I feel the same about those things here in Denmark.
In regards for those who seek social security programs, you could mandate some job searching /education demands connected to it.
But the other extreme things you believe i do not agree with it. I believe the state should have a role, you do not.
I believe health care is a right for all, you do not.
You say you want lower taxes on everyone. Well let me ask you this a
lower tax of nothing or very little, how will that make people afford
food, health care ect?
i'm not even sure what this means... but if my guess is correct... lower taxes will leave people with more money from their JOB and they will have more money to buy food, healthcare, etc.
No that was not what i meant. What i am meaning is we go by your views where all no matter if they earn 20.000$ or 200.000 or 2.000.000$ should have the same tax.
Then i ask you, if health care costs are 15.000 (just a number) for all 3 examples... i think you can figure out for whom it will be hardest to pay for their health care.
My point is that even if you lower the tax somewhat for the lowest income it would not make much of a difference for them since their original income is not that much compared to costs.
Where forinstance the 200.000 income would not have any problems paying for their health care, even if they had to pay 5000-10000 more in tax.
0
Quote Originally Posted by williamwallace:
You say you want lower taxes on everyone. Well let me ask you this a
lower tax of nothing or very little, how will that make people afford
food, health care ect?
i'm not even sure what this means... but if my guess is correct... lower taxes will leave people with more money from their JOB and they will have more money to buy food, healthcare, etc.
No that was not what i meant. What i am meaning is we go by your views where all no matter if they earn 20.000$ or 200.000 or 2.000.000$ should have the same tax.
Then i ask you, if health care costs are 15.000 (just a number) for all 3 examples... i think you can figure out for whom it will be hardest to pay for their health care.
My point is that even if you lower the tax somewhat for the lowest income it would not make much of a difference for them since their original income is not that much compared to costs.
Where forinstance the 200.000 income would not have any problems paying for their health care, even if they had to pay 5000-10000 more in tax.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Nowhere does it say you MUST have insurance. That is your choice. If you want to be a vegan, that's fine with me. If you
Hot Forum Topics
