|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 6:01 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Wow, on e politician calling another a liar.
Hilarious!
Can anyone document a time that a politician has actually told the truth? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 7:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Another Obama lie exposed:
| Obama wrote: |
"I can make a firm pledge," he said in Dover, N.H., on Sept. 12, 2008. "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."
He repeatedly promised "you will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime." - B. Obama |
| Quote: |
FACT CHECK: Coverage requirement enforced with tax
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer
� Tue Sep 22, 7:48 am ET
WASHINGTON � Memo to President Barack Obama: It's a tax.
Obama insisted this weekend on national television that requiring people to carry health insurance � and fining them if they don't � isn't the same thing as a tax increase. But the language of Democratic bills to revamp the nation's health care system doesn't quibble. Both the House bill and the Senate Finance Committee proposal clearly state that the fines would be a tax.
And the reason the fines are in the legislation is to enforce the coverage requirement.
"If you put something in the Internal Revenue Code, and you tell the IRS to collect it, I think that's a tax," said Clint Stretch, head of the tax policy group for Deloitte, a major accounting firm. "If you don't pay, the person who's going to come and get it is going to be from the IRS."
....
In an interview that aired Sunday on ABC's "This Week," Obama insisted that the insurance requirement is not a tax.
....
But a Democratic staff description of Sen. Max Baucus' bill calls the proposed fines an "excise tax." Penalties of up to $950 for individuals and $3,800 for families would be imposed on those who don't get coverage. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., said Monday he expects the family penalty to be slashed in half to $1,900.
The House bill uses a complex formula to calculate the penalties, calling them a "tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ontheway wrote: |
| Obama insisted this weekend on national television that requiring people to carry health insurance � and fining them if they don't � isn't the same thing as a tax increase. |
And, he's correct. Even if such bills utilize the tax system for convenience sake, it's no more a tax than a parking ticket is a tax.
This sort of obsession over technicalities is just tiresome. Calling Obama a liar because Senate and House written health care bills include fines -- regardless of how those fines are described -- is silly. This sort of total lack of intellectual generosity is beneath anyone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xingyiman
Joined: 12 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I have to agree that this was hypocrticical. If the afforementioned incident had occured involving a democratic congressman (and I am no ardent Bush supporter by any means) directed at president Bush the democrats would have been as silent as church mice and all the left media outlets would be promting everyone to "look deeper into the real meaning and motivations behing what representative such and such did"...spin....spin....spin. At face value I totally agree it was inappropriate but I demand that both sides of the isle hold themselves to the same standards as they hold their opponents. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| ontheway wrote: |
| Obama insisted this weekend on national television that requiring people to carry health insurance � and fining them if they don't � isn't the same thing as a tax increase. |
And, he's correct. Even if such bills utilize the tax system for convenience sake, it's no more a tax than a parking ticket is a tax.
This sort of obsession over technicalities is just tiresome. Calling Obama a liar because Senate and House written health care bills include fines -- regardless of how those fines are described -- is silly. This sort of total lack of intellectual generosity is beneath anyone. |
Except that if you don't pay a parking ticket there's no chance of an IRS swat team showing up at your house. Utilizing the tax system for "convenience sake"?  Are you joking?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 2:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Except that if you don't pay a parking ticket there's no chance of an IRS swat team showing up at your house. |
When an IRS swat team shows up at someone's house because they didn't pay their fine for not being insured, you let me know.
You're too gullible. People like you are directly responsible for corporations getting their way so often, because they invariably freak out in the face of reasonable reform.
"If you don't buy insurance, Obama's going to send a swat team after you." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 4:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Except that if you don't pay a parking ticket there's no chance of an IRS swat team showing up at your house. |
When an IRS swat team shows up at someone's house because they didn't pay their fine for not being insured, you let me know.
You're too gullible. People like you are directly responsible for corporations getting their way so often, because they invariably freak out in the face of reasonable reform.
"If you don't buy insurance, Obama's going to send a swat team after you." |
You're the gullible one if you think armed IRS raids on peoples' homes and businesses don't happen:
Jesson told WorldNetDaily that the raid occurred while he was driving his two boys to school about 8:45 a.m. Wednesday morning. His wife Trina was already at the office. At that time, approximately 10 state tax agents went to his home in nearby Fountain Valley and demanded the nanny let them in.
The nanny did not open the door for the agents, but asked them for a warrant. She said the tax agents then kicked the door in, terrifying her and her 3-year-old boy. Agents then proceeded to search the house without showing her a warrant, said Jesson.
Meanwhile, a second team of armed tax agents stormed the offices and warehouse of N.T.D. Electronics. Trina Jesson said she was sitting at her desk when three agents burst in and held guns to her head. She said they told her to get away from the desk, cooperate and she wouldn't get hurt. Revenue agents also rounded up warehouse employees at gunpoint, according to Jesson. Everybody was escorted out of the building.
http://70.85.195.205/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=22676
From the New York Times:
"Three businessmen told the Senate Finance Committee today of Internal Revenue Service agents who, with guns drawn, broke down doors, terrified workers and forced teen-age girls to change clothes in front of male agents in raids at the men's homes and businesses that they said were unnecessary."
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/04/30/us/3-businessmen-testify-of-armed-raids-by-irs.html
Anyway, I'll grant IRS raids aren't all that common - but the point is that if it's enforced by the IRS, then it is a tax, and the IRS are some really nasty people to deal with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Except that if you don't pay a parking ticket there's no chance of an IRS swat team showing up at your house. |
When an IRS swat team shows up at someone's house because they didn't pay their fine for not being insured, you let me know.
You're too gullible. People like you are directly responsible for corporations getting their way so often, because they invariably freak out in the face of reasonable reform.
"If you don't buy insurance, Obama's going to send a swat team after you." |
You're the gullible one if you think armed IRS raids on peoples' homes and businesses don't happen |
Not over not paying a small fine regarding your insurance mandate. As I said, when it happens over a fine for not having insurance, let me know.
This sort of paranoia just plays into the Insurance Industry's hands. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Dems writing the bills know it's a tax. They said so.
The IRS knows it's a tax.
The private tax consultants and accountants know it's a tax.
Obama knows it's a tax, but he lied about it.
Only Fox is confused.
How can we be sure that it's not a penalty or a fine like a parking ticket?
When you have a fine or penalty for something, it's the result of a criminal offense. Even with parking tickets, you have the right to go to court before the ticket is actually required to be paid. Most people either choose to just pay the fine, or to ignore the ticket, skip the court date, and become scofflaws and liable to pay at a later date.
With Obama's fascist-socialist poor man's health insurance tax, those who are working poor, or those who have decided to exercise their right to choose, will be forced to pay a draconian tax. It provides no health insurance. It is just a tax. There is no court date. No appeal. It is a tax levied under this latest addition to the tax laws and rules that the IRS uses to calculate your liability. Your insurance or lack thereof will be included on your Year End tax statement from your employer and must be reported on your tax return that you file with the IRS. This will also end the tax provisions that have allowed millions of people in the US to be exempt from filing tax forms each year. Everyone will be required to file. It constitutes a major expansion of the taxing powers and intrusive powers of the IRS. It portends dire consequences for America.
We can still hope this tax will die. It is now clear that these bills have been designed to destroy the best health care system in the world and deliver it into the hands of the government. It's looking more and more like most of these various evil bills will not make it this year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 6:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ontheway wrote: |
How can we be sure that it's not a penalty or a fine like a parking ticket?
When you have a fine or penalty for something, it's the result of a criminal offense. |
And this bill would essentially criminalize not purchasing insurance. There are reasons one could legitimately be against criminalizing not purchasing insurance, but if it is criminalized, like any other criminal act, there would be a penalty (in this case, a fine) for it.
| ontheway wrote: |
| Even with parking tickets, you have the right to go to court before the ticket is actually required to be paid. |
Yes, you do. You have the right to go to court to attempt to prove you didn't break the law. And I'm sure you could go to court to attempt to prove you didn't break this law as well; if you really had insurance, but were falsely accused of not having insurance, you could go to court to prove your innocence. But, if you really broke the law regarding the parking ticket, you're going to pay that fine. And if you really broke the law by not purchasing insurance, you're going to pay that fine.
This technicality-driven argument style of anti-governmental types is just tiresome. Call it a tax if you want, but it amounts to exactly what normal people call a fine: a monetary penalty imposed for breaking the law.
| ontheway wrote: |
| We can still hope this tax will die. |
Regardless of what you call it, I actually agree that this mandate is a bad thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| ontheway wrote: |
How can we be sure that it's not a penalty or a fine like a parking ticket?
When you have a fine or penalty for something, it's the result of a criminal offense. |
And this bill would essentially criminalize not purchasing insurance. There are reasons one could legitimately be against criminalizing not purchasing insurance, but if it is criminalized, like any other criminal act, there would be a penalty (in this case, a fine) for it.
| ontheway wrote: |
| Even with parking tickets, you have the right to go to court before the ticket is actually required to be paid. |
Yes, you do. You have the right to go to court to attempt to prove you didn't break the law. And I'm sure you could go to court to attempt to prove you didn't break this law as well; if you really had insurance, but were falsely accused of not having insurance, you could go to court to prove your innocence. But, if you really broke the law regarding the parking ticket, you're going to pay that fine. And if you really broke the law by not purchasing insurance, you're going to pay that fine.
This technicality-driven argument style of anti-governmental types is just tiresome. Call it a tax if you want, but it amounts to exactly what normal people call a fine: a monetary penalty imposed for breaking the law.
| ontheway wrote: |
| We can still hope this tax will die. |
Regardless of what you call it, I actually agree that this mandate is a bad thing. |
With a fine for a criminal offense, you have the right to go to court before you pay. No one can force you to pay until after you go to court. There is no fine or penalty due to be paid until after some kind of court decision. This is always true.
With a tax such as the one proposed, you must pay first. By not paying you become a criminal subject to additional penalties and prison time. You can only go to court (and the IRS has their own courts) to seek some kind of relief after you pay. So, you will have to pay the tax if your tax form requires you to do so. You will have no right to appeal until after you pay it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ontheway wrote: |
| With a fine for a criminal offense, you have the right to go to court before you pay. No one can force you to pay until after you go to court. There is no fine or penalty due to be paid until after some kind of court decision. This is always true. |
When you get fined because you don't have medical insurance, want to contest it in court because you actually had medical insurance and are being falsely accused, and are told you can't, you tell me about it. I'm sure it will happen about as soon as IRS swat teams showing up at your door over not paying your no-insurance fine.
Back in reality, this distinction you're trying to create affects no one. The bill in question criminalizes not purchasing insurance. If you want to attack that concept, by all means do so; I agree criminalizing not purchasing insurance is wrong. However, whining about the means by which they collect the fine is just petty, technicality-driven silliness. Most Americans aren't going to think of this any differently than any other fine, because in any way that genuinely impacts them, it's not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| ontheway wrote: |
| With a fine for a criminal offense, you have the right to go to court before you pay. No one can force you to pay until after you go to court. There is no fine or penalty due to be paid until after some kind of court decision. This is always true. |
When you get fined because you don't have medical insurance, want to contest it in court because you actually had medical insurance and are being falsely accused, and are told you can't, you tell me about it. I'm sure it will happen about as soon as IRS swat teams showing up at your door over not paying your no-insurance fine.
Back in reality, this distinction you're trying to create affects no one. The bill in question criminalizes not purchasing insurance. If you want to attack that concept, by all means do so; I agree criminalizing not purchasing insurance is wrong. However, whining about the means by which they collect the fine is just petty, technicality-driven silliness. Most Americans aren't going to think of this any differently than any other fine, because in any way that genuinely impacts them, it's not. |
First you admit that it is wrong - then you go on to rationalize it anyway. Very disingenuous of you.
You sophistry on here grows more predictable and tiresome by the day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| ontheway wrote: |
| With a fine for a criminal offense, you have the right to go to court before you pay. No one can force you to pay until after you go to court. There is no fine or penalty due to be paid until after some kind of court decision. This is always true. |
When you get fined because you don't have medical insurance, want to contest it in court because you actually had medical insurance and are being falsely accused, and are told you can't, you tell me about it. I'm sure it will happen about as soon as IRS swat teams showing up at your door over not paying your no-insurance fine.
Back in reality, this distinction you're trying to create affects no one. The bill in question criminalizes not purchasing insurance. If you want to attack that concept, by all means do so; I agree criminalizing not purchasing insurance is wrong. However, whining about the means by which they collect the fine is just petty, technicality-driven silliness. Most Americans aren't going to think of this any differently than any other fine, because in any way that genuinely impacts them, it's not. |
First you admit that it is wrong - then you go on to rationalize it anyway. Very disingenuous of you.
You sophistry on here grows more predictable and tiresome by the day. |
Keep whining about technicalities. Maybe some day someone outside the choir you're preaching to will care. Back in reality, we're indifferent to your sniveling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| ontheway wrote: |
| With a fine for a criminal offense, you have the right to go to court before you pay. No one can force you to pay until after you go to court. There is no fine or penalty due to be paid until after some kind of court decision. This is always true. |
When you get fined because you don't have medical insurance, want to contest it in court because you actually had medical insurance and are being falsely accused, and are told you can't, you tell me about it. I'm sure it will happen about as soon as IRS swat teams showing up at your door over not paying your no-insurance fine.
Back in reality, this distinction you're trying to create affects no one. The bill in question criminalizes not purchasing insurance. If you want to attack that concept, by all means do so; I agree criminalizing not purchasing insurance is wrong. However, whining about the means by which they collect the fine is just petty, technicality-driven silliness. Most Americans aren't going to think of this any differently than any other fine, because in any way that genuinely impacts them, it's not. |
First you admit that it is wrong - then you go on to rationalize it anyway. Very disingenuous of you.
You sophistry on here grows more predictable and tiresome by the day. |
Keep whining about technicalities. Maybe some day someone outside the choir you're preaching to will care. Back in reality, we're indifferent to your sniveling. |
The devil is in the details Fox (death by a thousand cuts). Funny how you refer to the systematic attack on our liberties as mere "technicalities". But I always knew you were just a sniveling pro-government, pro-tyranny lackey. And an admittedly un-American one at that.
And quit referring to yourself as "we". You speak only for yourself on here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
