reply to post by TDawgRex
That's a pretty astute observation! I imagine the Ebola, sorry, Obama administration will just farm the whole mess out to the Chinese to get it
running. There is NO WAY the government hacks get this one right !. I give you the US tax code, or trying to book camp site at a national park as
examples. In any case, The Ebola admin is probably looking to delay a working system roll out so they can get the max benefit of fines and the ability
to inflict more pain and suffering on the US Taxpayer.
[[A sore thumb issue bigger than the statutory authority for the IRS Code enforcement. Thank you.]]
"How can I be charged, much less penalized for what I haven't bought?" Am I missing something elementally messed up??
A bump for both of you and Dawg, to whatever maximized extent is enthusiastically warranted... because it has to get better. There was a beer
commercial somewhere that pushed,"It doesn't get any better than this." The beverage company executives who cleared that family of ads evidently never
visited The Mall.
This scenario is beginning to make the back of my mind remember Will Peterson quietly running for it from Hannibal's cell, and down a seemingly
endless series of switchbacks in the Red Dragon prequel Manhunter
. I'm afraid too of being assimilated into this one.
My Midwestern hangover has nothing to do with alcohol consumption today. This is madness somehow, or I'm just not getting the logic yet. I trust it's
the latter for now... but for pain inflicted I'm not even signed up and it's an adult pounder.
Emphatically, I'm as far removed from an analytical legal mind as a dead vole. I need a lot of help with this deal.
I submit that if the product (not even for sale but now mandated a tax) isn't even accessible, much less defined for cost in the beginning of this
supposedly binding electronic contract-- and I'm charged for it just for signing in as a penalty is attached
without a statement beforehand
of the attached charges considered, for just "going away"...
whether the charges are defined as public or private debt is irrelevant. Forget
the IRS agents... there just simply isn't any binding contract
between the purchaser and seller, by virtue of no considerations specified.
AS FAR as I know signing IN or identifying one's self doesn't define one as a legal party, except as through acquiesence or deception. None the less,
declining to sign UP by not accepting the terms
is supposed to be the uncorker-- or release from liability to the instrument: at least on the
Web I trust.
Of course, unless buried somewhere on page 465 (unspecified and speculative) there's a clause in the monster saying, "Here I am identifying myself
with a computer and an Internet connection. You have my permission to financially hose me dead to whatever extent you see fit, for my just coming over
to say 'hi'."
Wow, financial gonzo porn by electronic osmosis. Kudos fellas.
(Interim injection of confusion.. gee that was easy by now) Is this the reason it's explained the government can't enforce a monetary penalty for
non-payment or even participation IN the Obamatax? Because it's not even a contract? Here is where I'll have to bookmark the conclusion that either
the context or the poster is stupid, and I'll for now assume the latter is corrrect.
Gotta go through this again to see if the context makes sense from a different angle. I still can't comprehend the one logical disconnect nobody in
the thread posted yet... including me in spades for comprehension.
The government is defined as a private corporation. Check.
The body for collection of taxes is a subsidiary of the IMF,
the Internal Revenue Service. Check. Different corporation...
but still chartered private corporation however legally bundled.
Another private corporation(s) providing a service have managed to get the charges for said service declared an unapportioned public tax
Supreme Court. Check.
Did I miss anything? I hope so.
A commercial (tax) court administering a civil claim by the private corporate provider (plaintiff) of a public tax debt? Wait.
If the charges are being presented by the IRS, and as legally a bundled private debt on behalf of another corp...
Technically now a tax levy instead of a private charge for services; do we have sufficient disconnect from commerce, that the government itself states
that a penalty accrued by an inability or other failure of the consumer to pay the tax can't be enforced
Is someone in the government trying to tell me I'm liable for a debt that hasn't even been defined for cost center? Who's demanding the funds-- the
IMF, provider, Michelle's Travelocity bulk account, Val's Personal Checking? Aunt Muffy's Radiology School's Faculty Lounge Slush Fund? AAArrrgh.
All I DO know for sure (so far and until otherwise gratefully corrected) is that the IMF is going to initially demand funds for another unapportioned
tax that has yet been even defined in the appropriate jurisdiction, and in the alternative to a table of penalties for services that have been
If that rhymes I also did not attempt to channel The Bard.
I think we have a winner for even a bigger cash cow than psychotropic medication manufacturers... no thanks I'm driving.
But I want to stick around a little while to see what it does for you.
EDIT: This will be my only one, because I had to go back and cross-reference through it a third time: and make sure that pictorial diagram of
Obamacare had all the right pretty colored boxes connected to all the correct administrative hierarchy lines. That's just the organizational chart..
and you want them handling another 1/6 of the Gross Domestic Product BWAHAHAhahahaaaaaa.
Good luck on that Rigsaw Puzzle... it's like all the space chess moves between Dr. Magneto and the Livermore computer in one frame; with the
artificial opponent doing a Ruy Lopez on Sir Ian. "You shall not pass out!!" ROFL how I love him.
It makes no more sense than the bill does, and we'll be arguing the legality of the sucker until the sun winks out, God help us. I have to go pack
some more now, because I can't afford to live here anymore much less buy renter's insurance.
Glad I have at least one good 3-season tent left. Now to find a part of the planet without winters. Wish me puck... I'm headed for Middle
edit on 17-10-2013 by derfreebie because: Epilogue: It was born to die terribly, and take us all with it.