The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 49    Average: 2.3/5]
126 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 7448
Rating: 2.3
Category:
Date: 10/31/12 04:36 PM

126 Responses to Hidden Cam: Guy Redistrributes Halloween Candy

  1. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 4:36 pm
    Link: Hidden Cam: Guy Redistrributes Halloween Candy - Even kids know Obama`s policies are unfair.
  2. Profile photo of WakeToWood
    WakeToWood Male 30-39
    183 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 4:50 pm
    It`s only fair, it`s only fair. They say if we all had to actually pay our taxes in cold hard cash we would revolt. Yay to the children!
  3. Profile photo of turdburglar
    turdburglar Male 30-39
    4896 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 4:58 pm

    More political propaganda from the vocal minority. What a looser you must be, when day after day you post on IAB, just to argue the same garbage with the same couple of people.
  4. Profile photo of foursixty3
    foursixty3 Male 30-39
    30 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 5:01 pm
    and how, exactly, did those kids "earn" that candy?
  5. Profile photo of Keyh
    Keyh Male 18-29
    226 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 5:03 pm
    "and how, exactly, did those kids "earn" that candy?"

    Within the context, it`s earned by walking to houses. Someone that walks to more houses (i.e. works harder) gets more candy than someone that is lazy and doesn`t.
  6. Profile photo of Shelworth
    Shelworth Male 50-59
    389 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 5:11 pm
    I just hope they remember this day when they turn 18 and vote!
  7. Profile photo of Canoas
    Canoas Male 18-29
    427 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 5:21 pm
    "Within the context, it`s earned by walking to houses. Someone that walks to more houses (i.e. works harder) gets more candy than someone that is lazy and doesn`t."

    But that`s not a good analogy. Someone can work 14h a day and make 20$ while another dude works 1h and makes 20 million.
  8. Profile photo of Mad_Gremlyn
    Mad_Gremlyn Male 30-39
    512 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 5:23 pm
    It`s amusing the way neocons like crakrjakass are always tuned into silly videos that oversimplify issues to the point of being meaningless. Also, Halloween candy is passed out for free... you know, Crakr, redistributed. Nice fail, keep up the time wasting posts instead of getting a clue.
  9. Profile photo of defendors87
    defendors87 Male 18-29
    570 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 5:27 pm
    not saying anything, but was he dressed up as a monkey for a reason?
  10. Profile photo of sicker
    sicker Female 30-39
    325 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 5:28 pm
    Actually, the tax system requires people pay a percentage. The rich pay a lower percentage simply because they make more money. I`m pretty sure that isn`t fair - if you have 5 pieces of candy, you pay 1 piece. If you have 1 piece of candy, you pay nothing. Derp. Seems kind of simple to me.
  11. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3928 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 5:30 pm
    Taxing the rich more so that they don`t suck so much out of the middle class is not redistribution. You guys are so stupid. They will still be plenty rich.
  12. Profile photo of LillianDulci
    LillianDulci Female 18-29
    2674 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 5:31 pm
    If he was following Romney`s policies, he`d take from the kids with less candy, and give to the kids with the most candy and claim it`ll trickle down to the ones with less candy and they`ll have more than when they started.

    Also, when I was little, we (my friends/sibling/sibling`s friends) voluntarily traded candies with each other and woulda given some if one kid had much less than everyone else. We never ate all that candy anyway.
  13. Profile photo of SmagBoy1
    SmagBoy1 Male 40-49
    4432 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 5:35 pm
    This isn`t Obama`s policy. This is called "Federal Income Tax" and it has these crazy things called standard deductions. Coupled with lower income, some people end up not paying any taxes. It`s been that way for decades. Obama has/had nothing to do with it. Further, he`s not changed your taxes at all. None of you. Period.d
  14. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 5:38 pm
    `not saying anything, but was he dressed up as a monkey for a reason?`

    Haha, good question.
  15. Profile photo of AntEconomist
    AntEconomist Male 40-49
    356 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 5:55 pm
    @sicker: Must we keep repeating the same cr#p. Look up the figures on the Congressional Budget Office website. After deductions and exemptions, the top 1% pay around 30% of their income and the middle class pays around 14% of their income (all federal taxes combined). Go ahead and argue that that`s not fair if you like, but for god`s sake, get the numbers right before spouting off.
  16. Profile photo of wildancrazy
    wildancrazy Male 40-49
    138 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 6:16 pm
    Having different percentages as tax rates is why this whole issue wont go away. Flat income tax, on top of all the other taxes we pay should be the norm, and is fair...
  17. Profile photo of thelonious
    thelonious Male 40-49
    3286 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 6:19 pm
    "Even kids know..."

    LOL, you mean only kids are immature enough to think that there are 1% level candy hoarders.
  18. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 7:18 pm
    Someone can work 14h a day and make 20$ while another dude works 1h and makes 20 million.

    The latter could be a CEO whose leadership is more valuable than the former`s skills. He could even be an investor that practically disperses his money throughout the economy.

    Taxing the rich more so that they don`t suck so much out of the middle class is not redistribution

    How are they "sucking" out of the middle class?
  19. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 7:19 pm
    Compared to the income they take in the top 20 even 1 percent pay in MORE than their fair share of taxes.
  20. Profile photo of Bremir
    Bremir Male 18-29
    392 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 7:26 pm
    So, what we can really gather from this video is - A fun day for kids to dress up as Batman or a zombie and go around getting sweets and having a great time can be twisted into a political agenda to essentially take all the fun out of the day and ruin it altogether.

    Only a dumb **** like the guy in this video could do something like that. What a moronic video.
  21. Profile photo of uatme
    uatme Male 18-29
    1074 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 7:27 pm
    adults have all the candy, so we shouldn`t redistribute it to the kids?
  22. Profile photo of sutra46
    sutra46 Female 40-49
    2550 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 7:44 pm
    The kids are adorable - am gonna call the pohlise :-)

    The guy is a total swollen monkey butt.
  23. Profile photo of jops360
    jops360 Male 30-39
    689 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 7:45 pm
    cajun - its not the amount, its the percent. so those at the top 1% pay less of a percent than those below them. lets put it another way. they make 100 million but only payed 1 million, this is 100 times more than the person that makes $50,000 and only pays 10,000. but the % is the key. the first only paid 1% while the second person paid 20%. if you cannot get even this basic of math you have no right to call yourself educated. if you really want to go with this argument then why not pay the people who you claim are lazy more? that way the gap would close. but as we have all seen in the last 15 years, the only growth in income has been to the people on the top.
  24. Profile photo of neojester12
    neojester12 Male 18-29
    141 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 7:47 pm
    +1 to SmagBoy1

    Where`s that 5 cats guy?
  25. Profile photo of Langer
    Langer Male 18-29
    394 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 7:54 pm
    About Steven Crowder

    New video every Thursday!

    Videos of the stand-up comedian, FoxNews Contributor and social/political commentator Steven Crowder.
  26. Profile photo of jops360
    jops360 Male 30-39
    689 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 8:11 pm
    anti - that would be IF they were to pay their actual taxes, instead we constantly see them using every loophole to make sure they are taxed at the capitol gains rate. this is less than you or i pay. also your percentage is wrong for the middle class. we pay around 17% while the capital gains tax is at 14%. sorry to burst your bubble.
  27. Profile photo of jops360
    jops360 Male 30-39
    689 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 8:17 pm
    keyh - what about those that are not old enough to run to every house. i constantly redistribute candy among different ages so that one kid doesnt end up with a pillowcase full while the littler ones have not much. yes they dont like it but guess what, it teaches them to be happy with what they got. it tells them to be thankful and to share.
  28. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6912 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 8:24 pm
    HAHAHA

    Posted by a guy that sits on his ass all day living off of government redistribution!

    HAHAHAHAHAHA. Brilliant.
  29. Profile photo of gymcoach29
    gymcoach29 Male 30-39
    363 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 8:35 pm
    Very simple solution that everyone should be pushing for. FLAT TAX across the board.
  30. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 8:43 pm
    Awesome!

    @HG: Go stuff yourself: He had insurance, he got hurt, he collected on it.
    YOUR Obama wants to FORCE people to buy insurance, like it or not! BUT if they collect on it, YOU will call them nast names?
    Added to ignore list. Buh-Bye!
  31. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6912 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 8:48 pm
    gymcoach29

    "Very simple solution that everyone should be pushing for. FLAT TAX across the board."

    I completely disagree.

    If someone makes $20,000 a year and pays 15% they have to live off of $17,000 when it would be hard enough living off of $20,000. However, someone who makes $20 Million would still get $17 Million, more than most people could spend in a year.

    I would rather see one person who makes $20 Million pay %17 in exchange for 133 people making $20,000 not having to pay anything.
  32. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 8:49 pm
    I believe Holygod beat me to it.

    Crakrjak, you`re long-term disabled and out of work, right? Following this analogy presented by you, you`re the kid with a serious disability that can`t go out trick-or-treating with the other kids. Yet you rail against redistribution from those that can, without which you`d have no candy.

    I don`t get you, Crakrjak, I really don`t.
  33. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 8:49 pm
    What a looser you must be, when day after day you post on IAB, just to argue the same garbage with the same couple of people.
    @turdburglar: Are you attempting to be ironic?

    and how, exactly, did those kids "earn" that candy?
    @forsixty3: @Keyh already schooled you on it: If I goto 1 house for candy, and you goto 50, we MUST divide our candy even-steven beteeen us! Redistibution of wealth (Which was Obama`s famous awnser to Joe the Plumber - fyi) it`s only fair, so gimmie half your candy, dammit!
    Also: there`s an old-fashioned notion that kids (or their parents) who put some effort into making a costume should get a little extra candy.
    Gee,work harder and get more... NAW! Crazy idea.
  34. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 8:55 pm
    Sorry Cats, have to call you out on this one too. You have mental health issues, right? And you`re getting treatment FOR FREE due to socialised medical assistance (correct me if I`m wrong), in Canada.

    So, what I don`t understand is, why are people like 5Cats and Crakrjak railing so hard against a socialised healthcare system which is trying to help you? I`m not being facetious, I just don`t understand why you would be so vociferously and stridently against the hand that feeds you?
  35. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 8:58 pm
    But that`s not a good analogy.
    @Canoas: Um, yes it is! He even said "in context of candy" DUH!

    It`s amusing the way neocons... always tuned into silly videos that oversimplify issues to the point of being meaningless
    @Mad_Gremlin: Oh yeah! Unlike libtards equating voting with having sex, THAT is so meaningful! And stuff!
    Also, Halloween candy is passed out for free... you know, Crakr, redistributed.
    Um, no, it is YOU who fails to "get it". The "redistibution" happens AFTER it is distributed. RE-distibute... to distibute AGAIN! Passed out for free = DIStribution. Obama taking your candy away is REdistribution.
    Get it NOW?
    Nice fail, keep up the time wasting posts instead of getting a clue.
    Oh, lets see how many wonderful posts @Sad_Gremlyn has offered... ONE! Gee, thanks!
    Let`s REdistibute the posts! @CrakrJak and I will hand over 40-50 each... NOT! >-(
  36. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6912 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 9:07 pm
    davymid

    "So, what I don`t understand is, why are people like 5Cats and Crakrjak railing so hard against a socialised healthcare system which is trying to help you?"

    Pretty brilliant right?

    I`m college educated, well off, raised wealthy, self-employed, and a business owner. I should be voting Republican because it would work better for me personally. However I want the best situation for everyone in my country.

    People like 5Cats and Crakr are poor or lower income, and living off of or using government assistance. They should be voting Democrat because it is better for them. However they want the best situation for millionaires and billionaires.
  37. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 9:09 pm
    @markust: "tax the right, feed the poor, til there are no, rich no more" - Ten Years After
    Even if you took ALL the income from "the rich" it wouldn`t cover Obama`s ANNUAL DEFICIT!
    Even if you took ALL THE MONEY the rich have? It wouldn`t cover the USA`s DEBT.
    And if you did those two things, who would you tax next year?

    @AntEconomist: The voice of reason! But 30% of ALL Fed Tax paid just ISN`T enough! (lolz!)

    @thelonious: "top 1% candy hoarders"?? You imagine for one second that once Obama`s taken ALL the money from "the rich" he won`t come after YOUR money next? Mao, Stalin, Castro ALL promised to even out wealth... and they did! You`re ALL POOR now! lolz!
    Nice chart @Cajun! Very informative!

    adults have all the candy, so we shouldn`t redistribute it to the kids?
    @uatme: Adults DIStribute it to the kids. Engrish Rangrauge, please rearn it!
  38. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 9:18 pm
    The kids are adorable - am gonna call the pohlise
    @Sutra46: Lolz! I thought that too! Then I figured the parents MUST have given permission for it. I see many of them grinning wickely in the background. It`s a halloween trick!

    @jops360: Please learn how to read a graph before arguing that it`s wrong... the graph shows the ACTUAL taxes paid, NOT "before loopholes" so your doubly wrong.

    "we pay around 17% while the capital gains tax is at 14%..." Yes, and that`s allowed for each and every American, you got a problem with it? Vote! "...sorry to burst your bubble." lolz! Our pretty balloons are all still fine!

    Where`s that 5 cats guy?
    @neojester12: Don`t worry! Heeere I come to save the daaaay!

    >>I didn`t intend to post this much! So much stupid requiring a rebuttal, on one post!

  39. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 9:28 pm
    keyh - what about those that are not old enough to run to every house?
    But @jops keeps on posting teh stupid!!!
    So, you want a 3 year-old to eat the SAME AMOUNT of candy as a 13 year-old? That`s fair!
    it tells them to be thankful and to share
    No, @jops, it tells them that no matter how hard they work, how well they do their job, they won`t be allowed to keep it!
    If you do this for your own kids? Great! Have fun!
    The PROBLEM IS that `liberals` want to do it TO YOUR KIDS & without your permission!

    They should be voting Democrat because it is better for them.
    Thanks @HolyGod! And here I thought I lived in a "free society" where one had a right to his/her own opinion, BUT NO! The Democrats tell me what`s right and wrong, and I don`t have to think at all! Just like you @HG!
    @CrakrJak and I are smart enough to look through the leftist LIES and see the truth...
  40. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6912 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 9:31 pm
    In 1982 if you wanted to make the Forbes 400 you had to have $75 Million.

    Today you need $1.1 Billion.

    Meanwhile people are starving to death in this country. This isn`t some silly little insignificant thing like f.ucking candy. This is about people surviving. Kids not going to bed hungry. Sick people getting medicine.

    Go ahead and keep posting this s.hit the super wealthy are laughing at how gullible you are.
  41. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 9:59 pm
    @HG: So the BILLIONS the Democrats handed out in their TWO "stimulus packages" (1.4 trillion actually) helped feed the poor? Shelter the homeless? Heal the sick?
    NO!
    In fact the money went to... RICH PEOPLE! Who promptly made it DISAPPEAR! (Solyendra = 500 million bucks, POOF!)
    Before you whiiiine about it: YES! Bush signed the first one, which I objected to AT THE TIME! And Obama singed the second. BUT they were both from the Democrat controled House - it`s a fact!

    How about this: lower taxes one EVERYONE so they all have more money. Charity does way more "common good" than the Gov`t.

    But it`s difficult to "lower taxes" on someone who DOESN`T PAY ANY (the bottom 40%) so what can one do?

    Obama: Rob from the rich and give to... my already rich fellow Democrats!

    @HG: You need a lesson on how the USA`s tax system works too? How Reagan closed the loopholes? Doubt you`d read two words of rational thinking...
  42. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:05 pm
    @davymid: Watching the tree post (and seeing Vi Hart! She`s at the 7:00 & following! Not just her hands either, lolz!) has lowered my bloodpressure a bit...
    I`ll forego the quote machine...

    "Following this analogy presented by you, you`re the kid with a serious disability that can`t go out trick-or-treating with the other kids."
    >Possibly a fair analogy, I`ll not nit-pick over it.
    "Yet you rail against redistribution from those that can, without which you`d have no candy."
    >Ah! Nits to pick a-plenty!
    By purchasing insurance, OR relying on Medicare (idk which @CrakrJak has, nor does it matter, it`s the exact same thing!) which is a form of insurance via the "social contract", @CrakrJak is NOT "RE"distributing ANYTHING!
    The people pool their money, with then understanding that if SOME need extra help, THIS money will go to help them!
    It is "DIS"tributed, IMO that`s night & day different.
  43. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6912 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:07 pm
    5Cats

    "You need a lesson on how the USA`s tax system works too? How Reagan closed the loopholes? Doubt you`d read two words of rational thinking..."

    Here is a lesson for you:

    During the 1950s and early 1960s, the top bracket income tax rate was over 90%--and the economy, middle-class, and stock market boomed.

    Reagan and his tax cut philosophy triggered the massive debt growth you seem so concerned about currently. No spin, no "context". Just look at a chart for national debt and look what happens when Reagan takes office.

  44. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:12 pm
    "You have mental health issues, right?"
    @davymid: Yuppers! All my life (idk if I was "born that way" though! BUT depression has a genetic component, while gayness does NOT.) as long as I can remember. Yup! Might be from repeated head trauma as a child... which caused my broken neck...
    But I digress!

    "And you`re getting treatment FOR FREE due to socialised medical assistance (correct me if I`m wrong), in Canada."
    Yes, because last time out the Insurance company f*cked me right up the arse (no lube! not even a friendly reach-around!) and refused to pay ANYTHING, so this time I didn`t bother, and it likely wouldn`t have met the time requirements for a pre-existing condition.
    Oops! Digressed again!

    "why are people like 5Cats and Crakrjak railing so hard against a socialised healthcare system which is trying to help you?"
    Ah! The heart of the matter! Keyword: Trying!
  45. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:22 pm
    "I just don`t understand why you would be so vociferously and stridently against the hand that feeds you?"
    Feeds me?
    I applied for therapy in March. I saw the specialist in Sept. I start it... January 2013.
    Feeds?
    This is not "uncommon" or just a one-off problem. Wait times in Canada are measured in months and YEARS.
    Oh of course I could go for private therapy, counciling, all that good stuff... IF I PAY FOR IT MYSELF!
    Or IF my (non-existant) insurace would cover it.

    So how is that "better" than the USA system? Oh sure, if I get critically ill I get pretty darn good treatment! That`s a fact. I ruptured an artery once, (medication side effect) nearly "bled out" spent 4 days in hospital. I had insurance to upgrade my room but even without it I would have been treated.
    THAT is why I pay WAY more taxes than those in the USA!

    Taking the USA`s system and PRETENDING to make it "fairer" is a BAD id
  46. Profile photo of unmercyfuldu
    unmercyfuldu Male 18-29
    762 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:25 pm
    I agree with the point of this video. The wealthy feel as entitled to money as children do to candy and behave the same way.
  47. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6912 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:26 pm
    5Cats

    "depression has a genetic component, while gayness does NOT"

    What research or knowledge do you have that so clearly defines that when the people in the field who actually know stuff are pretty sure that it does.

    Here is a study from the Journal of Sexual Medicine: http://tinyurl.com/apdoqlm

    I know, I know science has a liberal bias, but here is a excerpt:

    "For several years, studies led by Andrea Camperio Ciani at the University of Padova in Italy and others have found that mothers and maternal aunts of gay men tend to have significantly more offspring than the maternal relatives of straight men. The results show strong support for the "balancing selection hypothesis," which is fast becoming the accepted theory of the genetic basis of male homosexuality."
  48. Profile photo of loleh
    loleh Male 30-39
    28 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:30 pm
    What if one of those kids built himself a machine to collect candy, and this machine did all the work for him while he sat at home laughing at all the other kids, and every Halloween it got bigger, now this machine is so big that it takes 90% of all the candy that is available. Bet the other kids wouldn`t think its so fair anymore now would they?
  49. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:32 pm
    Doubt you`d read two words of rational thinking...
    @HG I meant "more than" two words, that`s the old saying, eh? But teh counter was ticking...
    And: You read EXACTLY two words! LMAO!

    You read "How Reagan..." and completely stopped reading OR thinking!
    You then spouted off on a COMPLETELY IRRELIVAT side-track.
    But it`s hardly a surprise, in fact I predicted it!
    50`s: Post war boom, Korean War boom.
    60`s: Vietnam War boom
    Funny, you skipped over the 70`s before blaming Reagan for ruining the booms!
    By "funny" I mean "typical".
    80`s: Carter leaves office with MASSIVE economic and political problems.
    Reagan (here`s teh lesson part) ordered the following:
    LOWER the taxes on the poor. He`s the ONLY PotUS to actually do so!
    CLOSE hundreds of loopholes BUT lowered overall taxes.
    TAX REVENUE WENT UP! So please to explain how this "caused borrowing" from "lost taxati
  50. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:42 pm
    @HG: This is exactly why I`m done talking with you after tonight.
    I mention DNA
    You insult me, THEN link to a study about... NOT DNA!
    ""balancing selection hypothesis," has absolutely ZERO to do with DNA! Those ladies did NOT inherit "baby making genes" because their brothers were homosexuals.
    Depression: has a proven inherited component. Proven over hunderds of huge studies across the decades! Adopted? (like ME!) It`s STILL THERE!

    Gayness: Causes your Mom and her sisters to make more babies...
    Z-O-M-G you have GOT to be kidding me!

    So I`ve concluded: You`re either:
    An idiot (somewhat likely)
    A psychotic (who gets off on making others unhappy)
    A troll (Bing! Bing! Bing!)

    In any case, Buh-Bye! Unless your comments towards me are of the polite & friendly nature? You`ve ceased to exist. Play "devils advocate" or whatever motivates your visciousness towards me: by yourself...
  51. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3928 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:42 pm
    "depression has a genetic component, while gayness does NOT"

    Typical closed minded thinking. Things are only genetic if they affect you. Pretty much defines the thinking of the narrow minded conservative.
  52. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:46 pm
    @loleh: Why would adults (or anyone) give halloween candy to a machine? Alagory Fail!

    What prevents the other kids from making their own machines? Nothing.

    Ever Watch This Movie? Cube (1997) or it`s two sequils? They`re about a government project that just grew and grew until no one even knows what it IS anymore!
    Kinda.
    Cube is terrific! The sequils are OK.
  53. Profile photo of Modwain
    Modwain Male 40-49
    336 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:51 pm
    ok, so,, mature people shouldnt share their wealth cause even children wont?

    but children are selfish in the simplest way. This is normal for a child cause it has to do with maturing of their brain, same principle why children have problems with their location in 3d space and the location of others.. etc..

    anyway, so because a child cant comprehend the virtues and values of sharing, grownups shouldnt have to???????

    nice movie, but the point is missing
  54. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 10:55 pm
    @markust: One has been PROVEN TO HAVE the other has NOT YET BEEN PROVEN (or even found, no matter how tiny!).

    Any better? Arguing semantic while flinging poo at me isn`t nice dude.

    Fact #1: Depressed people still make babies.
    Fact #2: Homosexuals do not make babies (at least very, VERY few of them. Microscopic %).

    If a "homo-" freely has sex with the opposite AND same gender? That`s not homosexuality AT ALL.

    If a person is able to "change their orientation" which IS clearly documented by thousands or 100K`s of cases? How can that be genetic? One simply cannot change one`s eye colour, anymore than I can simply "choose to not be depressed". OK?

    By "change orientation" I include moving from het- OR bi- to homo-. Or Vice-versa. No one seems to have a problem with someone "coming out of the closet" and abandoning their heterosexuality... amIright?
  55. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 11:04 pm
    ok, so,, mature people shouldnt share their wealth cause even children wont?
    @Modwain - from Europe, you familiar with Mennonites? Hudderites? They came to Canada from Europe (via Ukrain in some cases) eh?
    Lots of us around these parts ;-)

    They FIRMLY believe in pooled resources and sharing both wealth and hardship as a society! Hudderites live `collectively` and farm that way too. They CHOOSE to live like that.

    Stalin came along and "redistributed the wealth" FOR THEM (killing millions of people in the process) during the Holodomor.

    Distribute: share, earn, agree upon
    Redistribute: forced, arbitrary

    Not dictionary definitions: that`s how it is in real life.

    Which is Obamacare: Buy what we order you to or you`ll go to jail. Hummmm...
    (whiners: if you don`t pay your TAX (Obamacare IS a tax) what happens to you?)
  56. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6912 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 11:21 pm
    5Cats

    "Gayness: Causes your Mom and her sisters to make more babies...
    Z-O-M-G you have GOT to be kidding me!"

    That obviously went over your head like most things do. It is saying that people who are genetically predisposed to have more children also pass on a homosexual gene as a way to balancing out the procreation of a single blood line.

    "So I`ve concluded: You`re either:
    An idiot (somewhat likely)
    A psychotic (who gets off on making others unhappy)
    A troll (Bing! Bing! Bing!)"

    I post a link to a peer reviewed article in a well respected medical journal and because you don`t get it I`m an idiotic, psychotic, troll?
  57. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6912 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 11:26 pm
    5Cats

    "Fact #2: Homosexuals do not make babies"

    Yes. Only gay people can pass on gay genes. Just like only blue-eyed people have blue eyed babies right?

    Do you have ANY idea how ignorant you sound? That isn`t the way genes work. There are recessive genes, genes that only trigger in certain circumstances or with certain combinations, genes whose traits skip generations. Take a first year biology class, you are embarrassing yourself.
  58. Profile photo of HolyGod
    HolyGod Male 30-39
    6912 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 11:30 pm
    5Cats

    "In any case, Buh-Bye! Unless your comments towards me are of the polite & friendly nature? You`ve ceased to exist. "

    I find it amusing that you want me to be "friendly". Go back and re-read our exchanges. You toss around insults constantly. Hell you just called me an idiot, a psycho, and a troll.

    Is that supposed to be a threat? Please, please, PLEASE feel free to stop wasting my time on here with your pathetic, ignorant, drivel.
  59. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    October 31, 2012 at 11:51 pm
    I post a link to a peer reviewed article... and because you don`t get it I`m an idiotic, psychotic, troll?
    @HG Oh Yes! I`m OBVIOUSLY only talking about that ONE post! You`ve NEVER been one of those 3 things before...
    An idiotic psycho-troll? I suppose you could be all three, that`s possible too.

    Just like only blue-eyed people have blue eyed babies right?
    See? Change the subject, it`s all you do @HG!
    IF blue-eyed people were 99.99% sterile? There wouldn`t BE very many left in the gene pool after just a few thousand years.

    You toss around insults constantly.
    "You did it tooooo" is a kindergarden arguement @HG. Furthermore I didn`t "tell you to do" anything. I simply informed you that I won`t respond to your abusive behaviour any more.

    Is that supposed to be a threat?
    And on that note (@HG entirely misses the point) Buh-Bye!
  60. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15841 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 12:10 am
    F*** those greedy little 1%ers! If some kid has more than the rest, we should take ALL his candy and throw him in jail, because he had to have stolen it anyway, right?
  61. Profile photo of ajd121
    ajd121 Male 18-29
    625 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 12:31 am
    "ok, so,, mature people shouldnt share their wealth cause even children wont?

    but children are selfish in the simplest way. This is normal for a child cause it has to do with maturing of their brain, same principle why children have problems with their location in 3d space and the location of others.. etc..

    anyway, so because a child cant comprehend the virtues and values of sharing, grownups shouldnt have to???????"

    @Modwain

    I guess you missed the part where even the children who were GETTING the candy said it was unfair.
  62. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 1:00 am
    davymid: What is there to get? My mom paid into the system her entire life, then she died of cancer. If she had been able to save and invest a portion of her FICA taxes that investment would`ve grown with interest and that investment would`ve been inheritable as well. The same with two of my grandparents. I`ve paid into the system most of my life as well, now I`m reaping those benefits and don`t feel the slightest bit guilty about it because our family would`ve been well off had part of those lost FICA funds been investable and inheritable.

    But alas, that`s not how the system was set up.

    $200 a month invested at a modest 6% interest rate accumulates into $385,557 over 40 years. That would`ve been a tidy inheritance. Considering my SS income is under $10,000 a year, I could`ve lived the rest of my life, pretty much off the interest, on that investment.
  63. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 1:00 am
    HG: So, please tell me again, who I should be voting for? Democrats that believe that sort of investment plan, that Paul Ryan is proposing, is evil? Or should I vote for Republicans that want us all to prosper and keep SS and medicare alive?
  64. Profile photo of LillianDulci
    LillianDulci Female 18-29
    2674 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 3:02 am
    "I applied for therapy in March. I saw the specialist in Sept. I start it... January 2013."

    I`m in the US. My mom has a condition that put her in the hospital at the end of 2011. It`s a condition she was born with but never realized she had until then. She had no insurance, so she couldn`t seek further treatment (the surgery to fix it is very expensive) until she fortunately got a job a few months later (after about 5 years of trying) which offered insurance. The scheduling for the surgery is backed up and she had to wait for a spot to open, even with her doctor trying to push her ahead on the list because she`s at risk of dying every day that she remains with the condition. She FINALLY got her surgery scheduled, in exactly 2 weeks, about 11 months after the original attack. If not for having good luck and getting a job, she would NOT be getting treated ever. And yet you complain about your wait times?
  65. Profile photo of Langer
    Langer Male 18-29
    394 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 3:15 am
    If a "homo-" freely has sex with the opposite AND same gender? That`s not homosexuality AT ALL.


    I can see that being the thought process of a lot of politicians x-D
  66. Profile photo of sharpydufc
    sharpydufc Male 18-29
    89 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 3:17 am
    yeah because children sharing sweets is exactly the same thing as adults that cant afford medical care for their families or a roof over their head.

    this is embarrassing....
  67. Profile photo of LillianDulci
    LillianDulci Female 18-29
    2674 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 3:42 am
    Also 5cats, my grandma was healthy most of her life (except once when she was very young). She had really good insurance because she worked at NASA and pretty much just used her insurance for her annual checkup. One day she realized she had jaundice, went to the hospital and was diagnosed with a rare form of cancer. Pretty much as soon as that happened, her insurance company was doing everything in their power to not cover her. They`d say they didn`t cover some of the medications she /needed/ and were in general making life hard for her. She went from being pretty much a perfect customer (healthy and active) to them trying to deny her coverage as best they legally could. Those people are the people that should be in charge of our health care? The profit motive is not a good thing and there are many people who end up losing coverage as soon as they get sick due to loopholes. They`re happy to take money, not happy to treat the sick.
  68. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 3:58 am
    It`s how we feed CJ. So I`m ok with it.
  69. Profile photo of trippyhippy9
    trippyhippy9 Male 18-29
    559 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 4:41 am
    3 times the amount of candy? That isn`t cause for redistributing the candy.

    People that make 50,000 a year aren`t looking to take money from people that make 150,000 a year.

    Give one of them a million pieces of candy and the other 1 piece of candy. Then see if they think it is ok to do a little redistribution.
  70. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14654 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 5:31 am
    Greed works in children too
  71. Profile photo of andybme
    andybme Male 50-59
    296 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 6:44 am
    lame comparison
  72. Profile photo of Burton_Ian
    Burton_Ian Male 18-29
    815 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 7:03 am
    Yes, a very lame comparison- plus this seems to be an unintended consequence of their argument; that is, they are equating the conservative ideology with adolescent and children.
    “WAAHH WAHHH SOMEONE TOOK IT BECAUSE IT’S MINE!! ME ME ME MINE ME!!!” Children are given a pass because they can`t empathize other`s personhood- why was this video even made?
  73. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 7:13 am

  74. Profile photo of Doiknowyou
    Doiknowyou Male 30-39
    999 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 7:21 am
    so...they prove that the rich think the same way as kids when they whine about paying their fair share?
  75. Profile photo of nubblins
    nubblins Female 18-29
    1743 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 7:34 am
    Because redistributing candy is the same thing as helping someone in need have access to healthcare and basic necessities.

    Fail post. 1 star.


  76. Profile photo of AvatarJohn
    AvatarJohn Male 30-39
    1059 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 7:46 am
    Theft is theft. So easy to understand, even children get it. But not liberals. It`s too hard for their mushy little brains to comprehend.
  77. Profile photo of lostinkorea
    lostinkorea Female 30-39
    3727 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 7:54 am
    Redistributing candy is the same as CEO crooks not paying their fair share of taxes...

    Umm...mkay! You keep thinking that.
  78. Profile photo of 8BitHero
    8BitHero Male 18-29
    5414 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 7:57 am
    Pretty crap comparison (and music choice)
  79. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 8:53 am
    madest: Don`t be condescending you`ve been fed off entitlements too.
  80. Profile photo of Pooptart19
    Pooptart19 Male 18-29
    2441 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 9:06 am
    Steven Crowder is a [email protected]
  81. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 9:14 am
    @LillianDulci: Yes, Canada is great if you have a catastrophic illness or accident! I am very glad about that.
    But, as @CrakrJak pointed out: we PAY for it, one way or another. The question remains, is it better to FORCE people to pay or to allow them their freedom of choice?

    Liberal thinking:
    Abortion: My right to choose!
    Insurance: No choice! Buy it or go to jail!
    (Not that you`re saying that @LD! It just strikes me as funny)

    Pretty much as soon as that happened, her insurance company was doing everything in their power to not cover her.
    I`ve been there @LD!
    THAT is why it`s often the best idea to NOT carry insurance, save your money and pray for reasonable health & luck.
    Even if you HAVE insurance? Good luck COLLECTING it! Obamacare does NOT ONE THING to fix this, fyi...
  82. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 9:30 am
    @madest: You smoke pot with your shirt tucked in.
    I need not say any more.
  83. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 9:34 am


    @Cajun`s excellent chart!

    @LostinKorea: Oops! I thought YOU said something dumb, but you were quoting someone else, LOLZ! My bad has been corrected.

    @doiknowyou: By what measure do they NOT "pay their fair share". Serious question! I have no idea how you reach that conclusion.

    @Burton_Ian: Look up the meaning of the words: Theft, stealing, appropriation, pilfer... go one, I`ll wait.
    Yes, if something is stolen from you, you tend to get upset, yes?

    ...kids when they whine about paying their fair share?

    @doiknowyou: So stealing candy from children is OK with you? They should just "shut up and suffer" eh? Nice!

    @AvatarJohn: YOU get it! Phew! At least there`s some intelligent folks left at IAB... (Besides @Me and @CrakrJak... and @Cajun, and @LiK :-) )

  84. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 9:54 am
    Lillian: IF you think HMOs, Health insures are bad about not covering costs, just wait until the Obamacare bureaucrats starts telling people, like your mom, that she`s too old and the surgery is too expensive for her to have it. Because that`s exactly what is coming down the pipe.

    The government has always been less efficient than the private sector in terms of cost, time and service. So where are the supposed `savings` of Obamacare supposed to come from? Answer: Reductions in service, they simply won`t be doing expensive surgeries on older people. They`ll just tell you to say your last words to them and let them die.

    Btw, this is also how the eugenics movement is going to step back into power. They`ll be telling pregnant women with special needs fetuses to get abortions as well.
  85. Profile photo of rickwhite
    rickwhite Male 30-39
    151 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 10:02 am
    That guy embodies the word "douche"
  86. Profile photo of triki-trakes
    triki-trakes Male 18-29
    83 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 10:19 am
    this is like me going out and giving everybody that has a poop load of candy....more candy and taking then candy from the kids that have very little candy along with their halloween mask and basket because "they should fend for themselves". WE WILL MAKE LIFE SO MISERABLE THAT THEY WILL WANT TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY.

    WELL.....what about americans that have no other country where to go?? are you going to make life so miserable they wished they had another country where to go.

    sounds about right
  87. Profile photo of phacter
    phacter Male 40-49
    4 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 10:21 am
    So, I got two things from that.
    1) Republicans see the world like children.
    2) They are proud of this immaturity.

    Adults, on the other hand, know that sharing within a group brings that group together. Families do this out of hand.

    What is gained from having people sitting on big piles of candy like a dragon on its hoard? It poisons relationships, creates power imbalances, and turns the hoarder into an overfed jerk. Sure the kid "wants" all this power, but every mom I know will tell him to "give some to your brother" for all these reasons.

    If you tell me this kind of punishment will make that kid less likely to work hard to get candy next year, I`ll say
    1) Good. Who needs all that candy?
    2) More likely he`ll work twice as hard to get even more candy to keep
    3) He`ll bring along his brother next year and make sure they`re both making candy profits.

    Complaining about shared sacrifice is Un-American.
  88. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 11:01 am
    The government has always been less efficient than the private sector in terms of cost, time and service.
    This is blatantly false. What was that you were saying before about how saying "always" makes you sound silly again? If you look at the cost to government per person, it`s actually your private system that is the more inefficient. But more to the point, you simply cannot say that the private sector is "always" better, just as you cannot say government is "always" better. Looking at specific indicators, there is no system that is the best across the board, otherwise we`d all do that. However, our system has proven itself to be less costly and more efficient overall than yours.
  89. Profile photo of Burton_Ian
    Burton_Ian Male 18-29
    815 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 11:04 am
    Alright 5Cats, I will "go one." That is neat that you have a thesaurus, just like me! But mine is online and not a paper book.... I looked up the definitions of those words you pointed out- kind of a faulty analogy though, don`t you think? I`m sure that you must know that America tried the whole `confederacy` thing before- and it didn`t work out very well for us! So our founding fathers decided to model America as a Federalist system (that`s why they are called `united` states, because there individual states that are unified by one central government!). Neat, right?
    If you don`t understand why it is ridiculous to compare taxation (legal and typically legitimate) and stealing (typically illegal and typically illegitimate). I am not going to patronize you by asking you to use your thesaurus but if all taxes are theft (because if there is no sense of progressiveness, how and what becomes fair?) then how could any tax be levied on a state`s population?
  90. Profile photo of Burton_Ian
    Burton_Ian Male 18-29
    815 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 11:04 am
    And that is a neat graph, but it forgets to factor in disposable income; flat taxes only seem fair- but a flat tax (at to some degree, America’s current system- for the lower-middle class) unequally burden those whom have less disposable income.
  91. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 11:48 am
    If you look at the cost to government per person, it`s actually your private system that is the more inefficient.
    This is only true if you falsely assume that the US system is a private one; it most certainly is not. In fact, due to the vast governmental interference and regulation, some could argue that the US system is less private.
  92. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3928 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 12:16 pm
    "What was that you were saying before about how saying "always" makes you sound silly again?"

    I new it would be just days before that statement caught him in the ass.
  93. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 12:20 pm
    @HA: While your system may not be 100% privatized, it is indeed more privatized than ours. Inflated costs your government pays are a function of how many payers your system has, and the prices they pay as a result. Obviously this is not the only reason, but it is a big part of the problem.

    @5cats: If your best advice is to forego insurance and "pray and hope" for the best is reckless and not feasible. For you it`s ok because you have universal healthcare. For someone in the US without insurance, a liver transplant or any surgery for that matter is well beyond the cost of what an average person can afford.
  94. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 12:33 pm
    As to the content of this video, it assumes the same thing that most conservatives assume, which is that it`s just lazy, unmotivated people trying to get something for nothing. Nevermind the problems of substance abuse, physical/emotional abuse, poverty, or the social inequalities that produce them. Nope, to these cons everyone starts out at the same point in the race, on equal ground. Thus the video`s premise is flawed and I cannot take it seriously.
  95. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 12:55 pm
    @patchgrabber: We should be cautious to acknowledge that "more privatized" and "private" are two seperate things. Perhaps it semantics, but I am merely arguing against calling our system a "private" one.

    Afterall, grey is "more black" than white, but it is not black.

    Inflated costs your government pays are a function of how many payers your system has, and the prices they pay as a result.
    Isn`t this exactly opposite the concept of capitalism? The same capitalism that faired so spectacularly until Europe abandoned it in the mid-1910`s in exchange for war?
  96. Profile photo of ledzeppeloyd
    ledzeppeloyd Male 18-29
    2385 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 1:02 pm
    this is a stupid way to look at this problem, the problem would be accurately represented if a few kids had say a dump truck of candy and everyone else had a handful. this helps
  97. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 1:11 pm
    @HA: Agreed, I do not consider your system to be wholly private. However, if privatization were better, wouldn`t you see partially better efficiency and cost with more partial privatization?

    Isn`t this exactly opposite the concept of capitalism? The same capitalism that faired so spectacularly until Europe abandoned it in the mid-1910`s in exchange for war?
    Against the concept of capitalism it may be, but the results are better. If the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer then every problem looks like a nail.
  98. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 1:18 pm
    @HA: But look to Hong Kong for a model that would serve in the US. Very capitalist, yet they have public health and it works quite well there.
  99. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 1:27 pm

  100. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 1:37 pm
    However, if privatization were better, wouldn`t you see partially better efficiency and cost with more partial privatization?
    Unless there is also more government intervention (if we are assume that government intervention in this case raises costs).

    What am I suggesting is that, yes, we have a more privatized system. However, we are further from a private model that Canada. This is because for every bit of privatization we have, there are 2 (arbitrary number) bits of government intervention.

    I don`t know the correct answer. What I do know is that, in most of the cases I`ve seen (not just in healthcare), the government is terribly inefficient compared to the private sector with only a few exceptions.

    If the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer then every problem looks like a nail.
    Haha - I like that one. What if the problem is a nail afterall?
  101. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 2:14 pm
    What if the problem is a nail afterall?
    Then I guess everything just came up Milhouse. ;-)

    (if we are assume that government intervention in this case raises costs).
    Ah, but this is the crux of the matter. My government negotiates prices for drugs with the drug companies, they also set standards of quality, and they are also the insurer. Based on this alone my government has a much greater involvement in healthcare than yours does, yet costs are lower. So in this case, perhaps, the government is not raising costs, they`re ameliorating it. The biggest cost save to our healthcare is the simplistic nature of our administration. Insurance companies have labyrinthian administration, and your government counters this with its own, equally complex administration. With a simpler system like in Hong Kong or Canada, less money gets wasted and more can be put straight to care. I know you dislike government but they aren`t always the worst at everythi
  102. Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 2:53 pm
    Oh come on, McGovern... don`t you even care how stupid you make yourself look? That neo-con propaganda has been thoroughly debunked, I guess you missed the memo.

    "It’s a great story – but it certainly is not the true story. Indeed, you may be surprised to learn that once the lion’s share of the ACA kicks in on January 1, 2014, not only are Members of Congress and their staff obligated to play by the same rules as the rest of us, they will actually be required to follow a more restrictive path to their health insurance than you and I." from that progressive bastion, FORBES
  103. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 3:39 pm
    @patchgrabber: Insurance companies have labyrinthian administration
    Perhaps this is due to governmental regulation though? Private sector businesses left alone tend not to overburden themselves. Don`t get me wrong, I think with healthcare the government must be involved. However, in our system, I believe they actually serve an antagonistic purpose.

    I know you dislike government but they aren`t always the worst
    I know that - anarchists are... 8-)
  104. Profile photo of bluntman1138
    bluntman1138 Male 30-39
    28 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 7:23 pm
    SO where is the Video where Romnyy takes your candy, and gives it to some Chinesse kids?
  105. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    November 1, 2012 at 8:25 pm
    chalket: Obamacare was rushed into drafting by several groups, according to the NY Times that published an article about the subject. But page 113 line 22 is still in the bill and does say it exempts members of congress and the president from it`s provisions. But as you noted that`s in conflict with what it states further on in the bill.

    No one knows yet just how this conflict is to be resolved, but it will take further legislation to correct this and other contradictions in Obamacare, that is if it isn`t repealed and replaced by then.
  106. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 2:29 am
    Alright 5Cats, I will "go one."
    @Burton_Ian: Ah, the old "attack the typo" defence! That`s ALL you got? It IS all you got! lolz! How sad.
    Truth Be Told: For the first time in YEARS I did, indeed, get out the thesaurus! However that`s because it was quicker to check the spelling, and to make sure the words I`d chose were actually accurate. My vocabulary is just dandy, thanks.

    What are you blathering on about?
    Taxation = the gov`t taking your money through `social contract`.
    Redistribution of wealth = the gov`t taking your money... at gunpoint.
    They`re not even REMOTELY associated, except for the `take your money` part.

    And that is a neat graph, but it forgets to factor in disposable income...
    Huh? What? One would presume that all the money left over after taxes counts as "disposable income", DUH! "flat tax" is someone elses issue...
  107. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 2:40 am
    SO where is the Video where BARACK OBAMA takes your candy, and gives it to some Chinesse kids?
    Fixed it for you @Bluntman! It is, in fact, Obama who has borrowed 6,000,000,000,000 pieces of candy from the Chinese. What are y`all going to do when China demands their candy back?
    Go smoke another, boy, & come back when you can form a coherent sentence...

    @patchy: My POINT is that one should be FREE to CHOOSE, not have the gov`t decise that "one size fits all" eh?
    A little insurance, none, a lot? NO! Only Obama can decide that!
    We`d all have more money in our pockets, so it`s quite possible we could afford those expensive things.

    As to the content of this video, it assumes the same thing that most conservatives assume, which is that it`s just lazy, unmotivated people trying to get something for nothing.
    Did we watch the same video? Explain.
  108. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 2:49 am
    "If the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer then every problem looks like a nail." - @patchy

    "What if the problem is a nail afterall?" - @HumanAction

    "Then I guess everything just came up Milhouse " [email protected]

    See? THIS is why IAB can be a great place! A good time was had by all!

    I`d say it this way:
    Capitalist: Oh look! A nail! (goes into tool box and selects a hammer) This should efficiently do the job!
    BANG BANG BANG!
    Cost = $

    Government: Oh look! A nail! At least it looks like a nail, better commission a study.
    (months later)
    Ok, they`ve confirmed the "nail-ness" of the problem. Let`s see: equal opportunity laws apply here, so we must allow ALL the tools equal access!
    Screwdriver: nope...
    Plyers: nope...
    Belt Sander: nope...
    (months later)
    Hammer: BANG BANG BANG! Hey! The Government solved the problem! Hooray!
    Cost: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ *gasp*
  109. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 7:39 am
    Perhaps this is due to governmental regulation though? Private sector businesses left alone tend not to overburden themselves.
    Well in this case I seriously doubt it. But let`s analyze: HMOs have labyrinthian administration on purpose. Why? It`s part of their job to make things as complicated as possible in order to deny claims, because HMOs are not in the business to help people, every claim approved is lost revenue. It`s just in their best interests to make things maddeningly difficult. To your second point, I have friends that work in large corporations such as GE, Syncrude, and others. I can tell you with absolute certainty that there is *no* difference between wasteful administration policies of government and large corporations. They both throw money out the window on the stupidest things, and administration is one big circle-jerk.
  110. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 7:50 am
    However, in our system, I believe they actually serve an antagonistic purpose.

    This is entirely possible. Perhaps the best argument against universal care in the US is that it just won`t work in your system, due to the huge impact of the HMOs and drug companies on your economy. Would 100% privatization be the cure? Perhaps. I can`t know for sure, but what I *do* know is that I HATE dealing with insurance companies. When I go to the doctor, I don`t have to fill out any forms, I just show my health card and take a seat. I don`t have to quibble with insurance people, or engage in month-long correspondence to justify a charge. I do have supplemental Blue Cross to help with some medications, because I tend to get all the bad genetic problems in my family, and in my limited experience with them, I have had more headaches than I can count.
  111. Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 8:06 am
    It`s just in their best interests to make things maddeningly difficult.
    Regarding capitalism (and deregulation) though, wouldn`t this line of thinking lead to competition undercutting the "bad" HMOs? Of course it would take time, and people would get screwed until then, but eventually a decent system has to be worked out (one would think)...

    They both throw money out the window on the stupidest things, and administration is one big circle-jerk.
    True... Though there`s the concern between private and public funds... (if you consider it a concern).

    Would 100% privatization be the cure? Perhaps.
    I tend to think a capitalistic approach would be best, though I can`t know for sure. After that, a single-payer system (like yours) is best. The absolute worst is our 3rd party payer system. Conflict of interests anyone?
  112. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 10:05 am
    it`s actually your private system that is the more inefficient

    First of all, lower admin costs do not necessarily mean higher quality of care. As a matter of fact, HHS has ways of hiding MediCare and MedicAid costs in other portions of the Departments (even OTHER Departments). Those administrative costs go to questioning certain procedures and how much hospitals charge. Public option, and other third party schemes, shield consumers from the costs of the services rendered. Since no one is "questioning" the costs per se, that encourages hospitals to raise prices and engage in more questionable practices. Case in point: in 2007 the Federal Govt paid $102 million to investigate MediCare fraud only to prosecute $20 million worth of it.
  113. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 10:31 am
    It`s part of their job to make things as complicated as possible in order to deny claims, because HMOs are not in the business to help people, every claim approved is lost revenue.

    This scheme is possible courtesy of the unconstitutional bans on cross-state health insurance states impose.
  114. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 10:46 am
    [quote">If your best advice is to forego insurance and "pray and hope" for the best is reckless and not feasible[/quote">

    Average cost of ER visit: $1300
    Average annual premium for a single person: $5000

    Odds that an adult will visit an ER within a year: One in five
  115. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 11:03 am
    but what I *do* know is that I HATE dealing with insurance companies
    @patchy: I know that feeling! Grrr!

    BUT ObamaCare doesn`t "Canadianize" the American system at all! It FORCES (at gunpoint) US Citizens to BUY insurance from PRIVATE companies!
    This should be illegal under their Constitution, BUT the US-Supreme said it`s a "tax" and therefore it`s OK.
    WAAAAAAT?

    So THAT is why we right-thinking folks oppose it. Obama wants the WORST of both systems!
  116. Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 12:43 pm
    Crakr: Since you are obviously so much more intelligent and educated than the rest of us, please show me exactly where the text of the ACA says what you claim it does. I have exhausted myself trying to find it. There is nothing remotely like it anywhere near page 113 in any of the following:
    H. R. 3590

    TITLE I

    Public Law 111–148

    COMPILATION OF PPACA
  • Profile photo of HumanAction
    HumanAction Male 18-29
    2357 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 3:12 pm
    Since you are obviously so much more intelligent and educated than the rest of us, please show me exactly where the text of the ACA says what you claim it does.
    I would like to see this as well as I have been unable to find it.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 6:30 pm
    There is nothing remotely like it anywhere near page 113 in any of the following

    Wouldn`t that mean Obama is actually breaking the law by giving out these exemptions?

    Wouldn`t be the first time though...
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    November 2, 2012 at 9:05 pm
    chalket: Page 628 of the signed bill,

    "TREATMENT OF EXEMPT GOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMS.—
    In the case of an exempt governmental program, no fee shall be imposed under section 4375 or section 4376 on any covered life under such program."

    It doesn`t come right out and say it, but sections 4375 and 4376 are for government employees and officials of the government. It also exempts the armed forces, vets and Indian tribes.
  • Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33127 posts
    November 3, 2012 at 9:21 am
    @CrakrJak: Aaaand now that you`ve proven them wrong? They`re gone!
    Next time: "CrakrJak never proves ANYTHING!!!"
    lolz!

    @Cajun: You got that right! Obama isn`t the only PotUS to "skip around the Constitution" but he`s done it MORE than any other.
    And in worse ways! War on Libya without Congressional Approval = Impeachment!
  • Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    November 3, 2012 at 12:08 pm
    5Cats: BITE ME. After just 16 minutes you assume "They`re gone!"?? What a dick. And you also assume that Crakr`s citation equals a WIN even when he says "It doesn`t come right out and say it?" That was the whole point, asshat, that the ACA does NOT "come right out and say" what he claimed it did. Double dick for you, numbnuts.
  • Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    November 3, 2012 at 12:11 pm
    Crakr: At least you tried, now maybe you could learn how to post a link? After a text search, I found that section (on page 684) Are you misunderstanding or purposely misleading? The VERY NEXT paragraph defines your "Exempt Government program" or did you just think that was not relevant?
  • Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    November 3, 2012 at 12:12 pm
    "For purposes of this subchapter, the term ‘exempt governmental program’ means—
    ‘‘(A) any insurance program established under title
    XVIII of the Social Security Act,
    ‘‘(B) the medical assistance program established by
    title XIX or XXI of the Social Security Act,
    ‘‘(C) any program established by Federal law for providing medical care (other than through insurance policies) to individuals (or the spouses and dependents thereof) by reason of such individuals being members of the Armed Forces of the United States or veterans, and
    ‘‘(D) any program established by Federal law for providing medical care (other than through insurance policies) to members of Indian tribes (as defined in section 4(d) of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act).
  • Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    November 3, 2012 at 12:13 pm
    In other words, they are exempting those already covered by Social Security, the VA, or Indian Health Care from having to buy additional, extraneous insurance. Period. Nowhere does it exempt Congress, the President, or anyone else. YOU ARE WRONG. Yet again.
  • Profile photo of OutWest
    OutWest Male 50-59
    546 posts
    November 4, 2012 at 12:11 pm
    LOL
  • Profile photo of chalket
    chalket Male 50-59
    2712 posts
    November 5, 2012 at 2:51 pm
    Aaaand now that I`ve proven them wrong? They`re gone!
    You were absolutely right, "CrakrJak never proves ANYTHING!!!"
    lolz!
  • Leave a Reply