How to order a pizza after Obama Care is in full effect.

Originally posted by TheBloodRed
Such silly propaganda stuff, I highly doubt things like this will ever happen!!

[edit on 4/9/2010 by TheBloodRed]

Uhhhh....except for the fact that it is already happening?!

In case you don't know, New York is already pushing for a "sugary drink" tax that includes soda, powdered mixes like lemonade, etc. It will add approximately $5 per week to the average household food bill. That's another $250 at the end of the year.

The reason? To combat obesity. Obesity, last I checked, was related to people's health and, according to the government and insurance companies, rising premiums and healthcare costs. The only problem? It does nothing to actually prevent or slow obesity since, forgetting any genetic component for a moment, it is about excess. And almost everything, when consumed in excess, is dangerous for one's health.

Further, in case you didn't know, alcohol and tobacco taxes started in only a couple of states and then spread like wildfire to a large chunk of them.

So, history shows us that New York will be first to do this, then probably New Jersey, followed by Pennsylvania, etc.

Then, when this tax does nothing to right the budget, they will begin targeting other areas: such as fast food, etc.

Originally posted by lpowell0627

Originally posted by TheBloodRed
Such silly propaganda stuff, I highly doubt things like this will ever happen!!

[edit on 4/9/2010 by TheBloodRed]

Uhhhh....except for the fact that it is already happening?!

In case you don't know, New York is already pushing for a "sugary drink" tax that includes soda, powdered mixes like lemonade, etc. It will add approximately $5 per week to the average household food bill. That's another $250 at the end of the year.

The reason? To combat obesity. Obesity, last I checked, was related to people's health and, according to the government and insurance companies, rising premiums and healthcare costs. The only problem? It does nothing to actually prevent or slow obesity since, forgetting any genetic component for a moment, it is about excess. And almost everything, when consumed in excess, is dangerous for one's health.

Further, in case you didn't know, alcohol and tobacco taxes started in only a couple of states and then spread like wildfire to a large chunk of them.

So, history shows us that New York will be first to do this, then probably New Jersey, followed by Pennsylvania, etc.

Then, when this tax does nothing to right the budget, they will begin targeting other areas: such as fast food, etc.

I guess you better start a Bush bashing thread all about it then. The tax in soda in NY first appeared long before Obama was even running, let alone president or even after passage of any healthcare. It is about the NY state legislators, not the president but if you want to just bash the president for this stuff, try Bush because he was still sitting in the Oval Office when this fat tax for NY came up.

reply to post by lpowell0627

The reason? To combat obesity. Obesity, last I checked, was related to people's health and, according to the government and insurance companies, rising premiums and healthcare costs. The only problem? It does nothing to actually prevent or slow obesity since, forgetting any genetic component for a moment, it is about excess. And almost everything, when consumed in excess, is dangerous for one's health

Exactly, so if you have enough money to sit on your A** and get obese, you can afford to pay for your excess, as far as I'm concerned. MAybe if they can't afford it, like the fat welfare queens/kings, they'll actually lose some chins and spare tires, and we won't have to look at their gross belly flab and cankles at the beach any more cause they'll lose it!!!!

reply to post by projectvxn


I would suggest to you that OutKast is indeed every bit as necessary to this debate as End, and you are. I have never, not once, (I think that's correct), read a post made by you that I disagreed with, but that is not what makes you necessary, it is your reasonable and measured style that makes you so necessary, and while there have been plenty of posts OutKast has made, that I totally disagree with, that person too has a proclivity towards reasonable and measured debate, and so necessary.

I have no love for progressivism, but I do not think all progressives should be dismissed as unnecessary to a debate. We certainly can't have a debate when were all in agreement, and regarding this HCR Bill, there is plenty to debate. Better we do so with reasonable people willing to hear our arguments than arguing with fools who just won't listen.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by projectvxn

 

there is plenty to debate. Better we do so with reasonable people willing to hear our arguments than arguing with fools who just won't listen.

Actually is those unreasonable people the ones that have help get us in the mess we are in this nation today, we were part of that group in our youth.

And . . . it will be those same unreasonable people that will be pushing for anything to keep downgrading this nation as years go by. . .

I deal with this in the way my own adult children agree with most of what is going on in this nation today, why? because they never lived in my time and when our nation was a littler bit better than today, in their minds they see no evil . . . yet . . .



[edit on 9-4-2010 by marg6043]

[edit on 9-4-2010 by marg6043]

why do people think this is left or right propoganda?
why do they even think it's propoganda?

who would have thought tanning beds needed increased tax

who would have though mandatory health care, or the choice of mandatory taxation for it was right around the corner in 08 or 09

the government, not left or right, but left AND right (look at who votes for this stuff) is finding any way to heavily tax us

it's not a leap of blind faith to guestimate they will tax everything and anything unhealthy, and leave you with nothing to eat but standardized government backwash

i don't know about ordering pizza being different... but seriously, this is where it's heading, and the fact that some people are still on the left vs right propaganda means alot of ats'ers are still under the party illusion

reply to post by marg6043


It must be annoying, perhaps even horrifying to watch your children agree with something you vehemently disagree with. I haven't had that experience, but in spite of it, I look forward to it, as I am sure my kids will disagree with plenty of my beliefs, and certainly when they become teenagers and begin to spread their wings, I have no doubt there will be plenty of disagreements between us.

You are correct, I believe, that it is due to unreasonable people that we are in the mess we are in. You are also correct that much of that unreasonableness stems from not having an experience of more reasonable times. For the first 90 or so years of this country's history there was no income taxation, and the first one passed was, by all accounts, reasonable, as it was repealed once the funds necessary to pay for the Civil War were collected. Then there was yet another long period in history where no income taxation existed in this Country, until 1913, and almost 100 years later, here we are, and it is amazing how many people believe this perpetual income taxation, is reasonable.

The founders would be horrified, and those founders declared war with a country that was not at all imposing income tax. What a difference in political views from then and now.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Thanks, I actually believe you were in my age range, but I see that you know what is going on and knows is wrong.

Not my adult children, they think everything is ok and that things done by the government is for our own good, even when they see things are not working for their own benefit.

But what it hurts me the most is the compliance and they way they see things, is not will to fight for what is right and is not will to have anything change back.

I guess political and corporate propaganda "something we are very aware off" is working its magic in our younger generation.

Why think of better days long go when reality is what they live in today.

The thing is that their reality is a manufactured reality.



[edit on 9-4-2010 by marg6043]

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

 

Thanks, I actually believe you were in my age range, but I see that you know what is going on and knows is wrong.

Not my adult children, they think everything is ok and that things done by the government is for our own good, even when they see things are not working for their own benefit.

But what it hurts me the most is the compliance and they way they see things, is not will to fight for what is right and is not will to have anything change back.

I guess political and corporate propaganda "something we are very aware off" is working its magic in our younger generation.

Why think of better days long go when reality is what they live in today.

The thing is that their reality is a manufactured reality.



[edit on 9-4-2010 by marg6043]

I was a total liberal when I was younger, but it wasn't too long after I read Das Kapital in college that I realized my naive belief in communism and socialism was misplaced. It was Karl Marx who convinced me to embrace capitalism! Most people tend to become more conservative as they age. Not all but most. I have often found the Myth of Icarus to be a great lesson in the hubris of youth, and the desperate attempt of age to somehow prevent that youths hubris from leading to tragedy.

Icarus was the brave and bold liberal who dared to soar where eagles do, and his father, was the brave, and even bold conservative, who tried to warn his son of the dangers of flying to high. Alas, that story ended tragically, and while many remember and know the name of Icarus, far less remember his father's name. I am purposely omitting his name in hopes that those reading this post and know the name of Icarus but not his father, consider exactly what that means. For, where Icarus ultimately failed and paid a dear price for that failure, his father survived and flew to freedom, even though he to had paid a dear price for it, but he flew! He invented the means to do so and he flew successfully, but most seem to remember the failure and not the successful one.

Today, we live in a world where the term Captains of Industry is practically non existent, but terms such as Robber Barons are a part of the normal vernacular. Where Hercules had many exploits and within those exploits, there were the 12 labors, today most only know of his labors and not that these labors were a part of his exploits, and I suspect this is because we have progressed towards such as Marxist reality that the word exploit is a pejorative and labor a honorable alternative. I am not saying that labor is dishonorable, I am suggesting that exploitation is not always such a bad thing. To exploit is to take advantage of, and why shouldn't we take advantage of all the tools we can muster to support our own prosperity and longevity?

It is a messy world indeed, but don't loose heart Marg, your adult children do love you, if not agree with you, and if you can keep at it, at some point reasonableness will prevail.

[edit on 9-4-2010 by Jean Paul Zodeaux]

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


That was not at all what I was suggesting. I like debating with OutKast. What I don't like is when people assume that their contributions are somehow more important than anyone else's. Talking about perpetuating the partisan divide as if they have the mole hill to stand on and preach with impunity.

All members of this site are important to me, especially the ones I disagree with. But I reject the notion that one must accept soapbox preachers who dont practice what they ask of others.

reply to post by projectvxn


Yep, I like debating OutKast too. Hell, I have no doubt you would be a blast debating, I just have never found any post of yours that would lead me to challenge you in a debate, and even the one I made in reply to you here in this thread is obviously not a debate, since I clearly misunderstood your meaning, in what I replied to. Okay then, please carry on with your most excellent reasoning.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


I'm sure we can find a technical issue to debate about somewhere down the line.

I keep finding myself agreeing with people I used to disagree with. If you would have met me when Bush was in office you would have seen me debating against everything the right was doing. It's the big problem with being a Constitutionalist, when there is an agenda driven political machine on both sides to fight with. A two front war if you will.

Now that the left is in power I find myself back to square one, Convincing people that what lead us to the disaster that Bush created can only be repeated if we make the same mistakes with a new guy from the other side. I find it disingenuous when the rightwingers hide behind the Constitution as if they had always respected our Supreme Law. I believe this particular thread could be applied to any situation in the last 40 years in American politics.

reply to post by projectvxn


And yet once again I agree with you! In fact, I have a hard time not getting annoyed at all the posters that will ask where were we when Bush was in office, as if our reasoning is somehow defined by party politics. I liked Bush as person, hell I liked Clinton as person, but I despise what they have done to this country, and now there is Obama. Even further, while I do believe there was plenty to admire about Ronald Regan, his legend has grown, while history tells a different story. Regan expanded government, and convinced his voters he was for less government. Every President since at least Wilson and probably as far back as Lincoln has engaged in what seems like a game of one upmanship in who can expand government the most. Sigh.

I look forward to someday disagreeing with you, as I am sure that disagreement will only make us both sharper in our beliefs. Until that time, I look forward to agreeing with you.

Originally posted by K J Gunderson
I guess you better start a Bush bashing thread all about it then. The tax in soda in NY first appeared long before Obama was even running, let alone president or even after passage of any healthcare. It is about the NY state legislators, not the president but if you want to just bash the president for this stuff, try Bush because he was still sitting in the Oval Office when this fat tax for NY came up.

I didn't mention Obama anywhere in my post, so why don't you just stick to the facts that I wrote. Further, I have no problem bashing Bush when necessary, but seeing as how he is no longer President and can't do jack now, it would be a waste of time and energy.

Lastly, instead of trying to turn this into an Obama / Bush thing, perhaps you should know that New York is controlled by its governor, not the President!!!!

A year ago, New York governor David Paterson proposed an 18% tax on sodas and sugary drinks..........

See full article from DailyFinance: srph.it...

[edit on 9-4-2010 by lpowell0627]

Originally posted by ldyserenity

Exactly, so if you have enough money to sit on your A** and get obese, you can afford to pay for your excess, as far as I'm concerned. MAybe if they can't afford it, like the fat welfare queens/kings, they'll actually lose some chins and spare tires, and we won't have to look at their gross belly flab and cankles at the beach any more cause they'll lose it!!!!

This is a ridiculous argument. The tax applies to everyone.

I drink one can of soda a day, workout 7 times per week, and purchase 100% juice for my kids. Both of my children are in the 40th percentile for weight.

Why should I, and other people capable of using these products responsibly, pay more because others can't or don't want to ???

Further, by pushing people to diet drinks, they are increasing the consumption of artificial sweetners, which are known to be bad for your health.

Originally posted by lpowell0627

Originally posted by ldyserenity

Exactly, so if you have enough money to sit on your A** and get obese, you can afford to pay for your excess, as far as I'm concerned. MAybe if they can't afford it, like the fat welfare queens/kings, they'll actually lose some chins and spare tires, and we won't have to look at their gross belly flab and cankles at the beach any more cause they'll lose it!!!!

This is a ridiculous argument. The tax applies to everyone.

I drink one can of soda a day, workout 7 times per week, and purchase 100% juice for my kids. Both of my children are in the 40th percentile for weight.

Why should I, and other people capable of using these products responsibly, pay more because others can't or don't want to ???

Further, by pushing people to diet drinks, they are increasing the consumption of artificial sweetners, which are known to be bad for your health.

Yes good argument, but in the video it was going by his weight/health issues, which is what I was commenting on. Soo the taxes right now as they stand, yes if you're doing it responsibly then you won't be buying all that much to begin with so I still don't see the point of worrying over it. Buy less, then you have no reason to complain. I think they should start at alcohol taxes though, since those idiots don't just put themselves in danger; they put me, you, and everybody else who might be on the roads with there drunken reatarded a** at the same time at risk! But there are also unfair tax breaks, have you heard about the large boat tax break? Seems to me that's worth so much more attention than this garbage.

Originally posted by ldyserenity
Soo the taxes right now as they stand, yes if you're doing it responsibly then you won't be buying all that much to begin with so I still don't see the point of worrying over it.

Because we are being taxed to death, little by little, which adds up at the end of the year. This is exactly the government's philosophy -- and by government, I mean state and federal. See, the government says: It will only be a few bucks more for this......and well, this....and then this....

But, it all adds up after a while. A few bucks here....a few bucks there...and what you know? The government just got another few hundred dollars a year from your hard-earned money.

They count on people saying it applies to someone else. They count on the fact that "a few dollars" means nothing. They count on the fact that the people will not add these amounts together and see the end result. I showed you it would be another $250 per year for me and I am by far a small consumer of these products. However, in ten years, that equals a minimum of $2500. Not incorporating inflation of course, and since these taxes are done by percentage, they begin to rise quickly as do the prices.

think they should start at alcohol taxes though, since those idiots don't just put themselves in danger; they put me, you, and everybody else who might be on the roads with there drunken reatarded a** at the same time at risk!

I didn't realize I was debating with someone that isn't even aware that they already do it with alcohol!!!!! Please wake up before you help cost me and others tons of money in frivolous taxes.

It started with tobacco and alcohol, is spreading to drinks and fast food, tanning beds, and oh yeah -- CO2.

At what point do we say enough?!

[edit on 9-4-2010 by lpowell0627]

Originally posted by lpowell0627
I didn't mention Obama anywhere in my post, so why don't you just stick to the facts that I wrote.

This thread is about OBAMA CARE. You can tell by reading the title where it clearly states OBAMA CARE.

Further, I have no problem bashing Bush when necessary, but seeing as how he is no longer President and can't do jack now, it would be a waste of time and energy.

But it is a good use of energy to jump on an Obama bashing bandwagon with something that happened well before him or his care plan? How does that make any sense?

Lastly, instead of trying to turn this into an Obama / Bush thing, perhaps you should know that New York is controlled by its governor, not the President!!!!

LOL. Try actually reading my post where I pointed out that the president had nothing to do with it either way. Again, this thread is about taxes due to OBAMA CARE. If you cannot follow along, you are out of place. Your complaint has nothing to do with Obama or his health reform. So why did you bother bringing it up in this thread about Obama?

A year ago, New York governor David Paterson proposed an 18% tax on sodas and sugary drinks..........

See full article from DailyFinance: srph.it...

[edit on 9-4-2010 by lpowell0627]

If only your LOL made any sense given that this thread is about Obama care and I said the president had nothing to do with your complaint. Perhaps less time chuckling and more time reading would help.

Next time, read the thread title. Read the other posts in the thread. Especially read what you respond to. Good luck next time.

Hey, if anyone one on the DEM or REPUB side can find me some Orwellian videos in regards to Bush 1 or Bush 2 or Clinton or Reagan U2U me. I will post them.

Sorry if the poster boy for BIG gov is now Obama. Really I am. NOT.

People keep trying to push me to one Party or the other, SORRY ain't part of either.

Social Liberal, Fiscal Conservative, Constitutional Libertarian. Absolute hater of Orwellian moves in all their aspects.

As for eliminating all the taxes, one flat tax of sales could run the government. And taxes on corporations alone I did not mean higher than other country's, I would suggest just a little under the lowest in the world.

If you did not notice, industry in the US has decreased so we are actually number 3 in the world now.

And just because you do not understand that the majority of our government's income does NOT come from personal income taxes does not mean I do not know.

Google the CAFR's and take a looksee where our government gets it's income from.

All personal income taxes go to the Federal Reserve.

Yes, Obamacare is in the title of the video. Maybe you should watch it and see what it is REALLY about.

[edit on 4/9/2010 by endisnighe]

Originally posted by ldyserenity

reply to post by lpowell0627

 

The reason? To combat obesity. Obesity, last I checked, was related to people's health and, according to the government and insurance companies, rising premiums and healthcare costs. The only problem? It does nothing to actually prevent or slow obesity since, forgetting any genetic component for a moment, it is about excess. And almost everything, when consumed in excess, is dangerous for one's health

Exactly, so if you have enough money to sit on your A** and get obese, you can afford to pay for your excess, as far as I'm concerned. MAybe if they can't afford it, like the fat welfare queens/kings, they'll actually lose some chins and spare tires, and we won't have to look at their gross belly flab and cankles at the beach any more cause they'll lose it!!!!

I see. Then you agree that the government has a right to tell you how to live your life, or else.

Maybe you really SHOULD read "1984" by Orwell and then get back with us.