Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:06pm PT
|
Yes, I did vote, I do vote- this was never a tax issue at all until the supreme court ruled it so.
Oh? What provision of the Federal Code did the ACA alter?
Ferris? Ferris?
It was the IRS code. THAT is where you find the ACA in Federal Law.
|
|
Skeptimistic
Mountain climber
La Mancha
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jun 28, 2012 - 01:07pm PT
|
He just had a bad outcome, which happens, and you are blaming on the lack of Capt. Kirk's transporter beam.
Best retort of the thread so far! Love it!
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:10pm PT
|
If you are you're being taxed twice. Once for being in business then again for being self employed. Welcome to America where double taxation is a normal practice.
Here we get taxed when we buy equipment then the Assessor taxes us again for owning equipment and using it. Yeah! Here we have to have a state contractors license and then we have to have a state business license and then we have to have a city of Reno and a city of Sparks business License and then we have to have a county business license.
And people wonder why sh#t costs so much this is just a sample of the taxes and fees I pay to do business and add insurance costs holy sh#t its through the roof.
It is EXPENSIVE to live in freedom, in one of the most beautiful countries on the planet, as the only superpower with military might that cannot be compared to anyone, with a very high standard of living, with most great natural areas preserved, with most great climbing areas made accessible.
You seem to want all that for free. It isn't.
|
|
Brandon-
climber
The Granite State.
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:15pm PT
|
Kind of OT, but Silver got me thinking about it.
Why do sole proprietors, the people pushing business forward through their motivation to succeed, have to pay more in taxes than a payrolled employee?
That doesn't seem right.
I incur no costs upon the government. (meaning no handouts) I'm fine with taxes, but it does seem kind of unfair to hit the self employed guy harder than the person who clocks in and clocks out, leaving work at work. I'm stuck taking work home with me, designs, materials pricing, bookkeeping, follow ups with clients, etc.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:20pm PT
|
Compared to Social Security, Ponzi ran an honest game.
|
|
Elcapinyoazz
Social climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:22pm PT
|
I incur no costs upon the government.
Really? You don't drive on roads, drink clean water, breathe clean air, purchase safe products, have a legal system to protect your contracts, get defended by police, fire, and the military, etc, etc, etc?
And Silver, for a guy who lives in a state with no state income tax, there sure is a lot of complaining about taxes from you. The money to run the place has to come from somewhere.
|
|
kennyt
climber
Woodfords,California
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:23pm PT
|
Brandon, You need a new accountant
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:24pm PT
|
I was late for work reading the opinions, and I have to admit they surprised me. When someone (Anders[Mighty Hiker]?) asked me shortly after the law was enacted what I thought of the court challenges, I opined that I thought they were hopeless because of Wickard v. Filburn, upholding federal wheat regulations affecting wheat that never left the plaintiff's farm under the Commerce Clause.
After the oral argument, I changed my mind and thought that the Act would be overturned, based on the commerce clause. I didn't think they would uphold it under the taxing clause because of their virtually unanimous questioning of the applicability of the Anti-Injunction Act. Somehow, the majority danced around that.
Ultimately, I think this ruling is the best for American jurisprudence, because it puts what is obviously a political question in the realm of elective politics, where it belongs.
Ginsburg's dissent (I'm tempted to spell it "descent") on the Commerce Clause, however, should alarm civil libertarians. Since anything affects interstate commerce by the logic of that opinion, Congress can regulate any behavior whatsoever. Our only protection would be not in the enumerated limits on congressional power (see, e.g. Stevens' dissenting opinion in Citizens United, in which Ginsburg joined), but in the non-enumerated powers in the "penumbra" of the Constitution, "found" in Roe v. Wade. Talk about subjectivity!
John
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:29pm PT
|
i say this,, that if SS goes away (of which ive contributed much $$$$) for my retiremnet,,i will become a bank robber.
Ron,
my guess is that you have paid in much much less in SS than you will get in benefits
you will come out way ahead, if you live long enough to start collecting
In addition, Social Security will not go "bankrupt"
In fact, it will pay FULL benefits for the next 25 years Ron, so you will get lots of money
and after that, if is NOT fixed by some easy stuff, then it will still pay benefits, but at a reduced amount
You can thank the Democrats, Ron, for creating SS way back in 1938.
And you can thank them for creating Medicare, which will pay for YOUR healthcare when you reach 65.
And you can thank them now, for paying for YOUR healthcare if you cannot afford to buy it on your own, like if you show income of around 28K or less.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:31pm PT
|
Like the little boy who cried wolf way too often, Fattrad gets it wrong again
Tomorrow is going to be a wonderful day...
...SCOTUS will rule the most significant portion of ObamaCare unconstitutional.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:35pm PT
|
@Ken M,
… One view is to make all procedures available everywhere. The other, increasingly prevalent view, is to concentrate those procedures into "centers of excellence", where they do a LOT of them. Beyond question, centers that do a lot of procedures have consistently much better outcomes than places that do them occasionally
That has absolutely no bearing on anything in my post. Anytime I have needed specialized care I have gone to a center of excellence. Where do I argue against that?
You have to be careful of people, even DOCTORS, who have political agendas.
My experience in talking with colleagues from England is quite different
Political agendas cut both ways. I’m glad you have colleagues across the pond, but I have reasons to trust my sources.
I ABSOLUTELY guarantee you that if your brother had had an MRI, his shoulder would be no better today.
I know about MRIs, way more than the average person. My point, perhaps not well stated, was that they blew him off despite his efforts to get attention.
I recently had my left shoulder MRId. The report did not look good, but the orthopedic surgeon looked at it and at me and pronounced it to be bunk, got me in with a good P/T, and the results are excellent. On the other hand in 2004 I had the other shoulder MRId and when the same doctor looked at it he said I had no option other than surgery. The result is a great shoulder. That is what I called good health care, and not what my brother got. I’ve had long conversations with him and his situation is not unique.
Your unsophisticated view of how medicine is best practiced doesn't help, either…
What’s up with the condescending attitude? I have a lot of experience with health care as a very successful patient, and survivor of a critical condition, who is interactive and pro-active with my doctors and the entire process. You say that I advocate a third world system? Far from it. Read my words before you jump in to press your own agenda. And get hip to the fact that health care is a two way street where the patient should have as much to say about the outcome as the doctor. You’re at UCLA, right? One of the things I really liked about being there as a patient is the teaching hospital environment, where it was open to me to be as well informed about my condition and treatment as my curiosity would allow. Once the docs understood and trusted me, everything was always on the table.
|
|
Brandon-
climber
The Granite State.
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:36pm PT
|
Hey Norton, quit stirring the pot. Let's have a rational, intelligent discussion.
ST needs that sort of thing.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:38pm PT
|
The affordable health care act is far from perfect but far better than the status quo. Havard Medical school estimates 45,000 people die in the United States each year due to lack of health insurance. The affordable care act should end that
We lament news of a handful of people dying in an event here or a dozen in a plane crash somewhere but thousands due yearly from lack of treatment. Just sayin'
Single payer, like the rest of the civilized world, would be a better idea but the multi-billion dollar health insurance industry won't expire without a huge fight.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/09/17/us-usa-healthcare-deaths-idUSTRE58G6W520090917
(Reuters) - Nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year -- one every 12 minutes -- in large part because they lack health insurance and can not get good care, Harvard Medical School researchers found in an analysis released on Thursday.
"We're losing more Americans every day because of inaction ... than drunk driving and homicide combined," Dr. David Himmelstein, a co-author of the study and an associate professor of medicine at Harvard, said in an interview with Reuters.
Overall, researchers said American adults age 64 and younger who lack health insurance have a 40 percent higher risk of death than those who have coverage.
The findings come amid a fierce debate over Democrats' efforts to reform the nation's $2.5 trillion U.S. healthcare industry by expanding coverage and reducing healthcare costs.....
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:39pm PT
|
thanks for reminding me, Brandon
sorry about that
|
|
yosguns
climber
Durham, NC
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:39pm PT
|
John, can you spell this out?
Ginsburg's dissent (I'm tempted to spell it "descent") on the Commerce Clause, however, should alarm civil libertarians. Since anything affects interstate commerce by the logic of that opinion, Congress can regulate any behavior whatsoever. Our only protection would be not in the enumerated limits on congressional power (see, e.g. Stevens' dissenting opinion in Citizens United, in which Ginsburg joined), but in the non-enumerated powers in the "penumbra" of the Constitution, "found" in Roe v. Wade. Talk about subjectivity!
How would the "penumbra" protections (privacy, etc.) limit congressional power to regulate under the Commerce Clause? I don't follow, but I sort of glaze over when people start talking con law. I just always separated the penumbra of the Constitution from the Commerce Clause and (lack of) limitations.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:42pm PT
|
Mr Baba writes:
"Havard Medical school estimates 45,000 people die in the United States each year due to lack of health insurance."
I've never seen "lack of insurance" listed as the cause of death in the obituary column.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:42pm PT
|
Kris...don't fear (or maybe you should) the current American health system does a great job of killing it's patients. So before you go attacking other countries, maybe you should put that energy into cleaning up our act here.
"The Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) seminal study of preventable medical errors estimated as many as 98,000 people die every year at a cost of $29 billion.1 If the Centers for Disease Control were to include preventable medical errors as a category, these conclusions would make it the sixth leading cause of death in America. 2
Further research has confirmed the extent of medical errors. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that there were 181,000 severe injuries attributable to medical negligence in 2003.3 The Institute for Healthcare Improvement estimates there are 15 million incidents of medical harm each year.4 HealthGrades, the nation’s leading healthcare rating organization, found that Medicare patients who experienced a patient-safety incident had a one-in-five chance of dying as a result."
|
|
yosguns
climber
Durham, NC
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:45pm PT
|
I've never seen "lack of insurance" listed as the cause of death in the obituary column.
Chaz, don't be dense. This number, 45,000, indicates the number of people who, but for lack of insurance, would not have died for whatever reasonably (per Harvard's study) related reason.
EDIT: Yeah, but if you were joking...it's hard to tell. I don't pay attention.
|
|
nature
climber
SoSlo, CO
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:46pm PT
|
^^^^ uh...... he doesn't joke
|
|
cragonym
climber
|
|
|
Jun 28, 2012 - 01:48pm PT
|
Fantastic!
now all we need is the supreme court to pull it's head out on corporate personhood and then this country will really get on the right track.
Ins companies and corporations RULE all of us, left right, libertariannutjobs, greens, musloms, christions, etc, etc, etc.
bump
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!