Thank you Massachusetts!

Women talking politics makes me hornier then hell...... Originally Posted by Hercules

So why will the unions get a special tax break? Originally Posted by Ansley

SAME REASON EVER OTHER SWINGING DICK DOES. THEY BOUGHT AND PAID FOR IT WITH VOTES!

Sorry bout the caps. I don't see you bitching about bank tax breaks



People that own homes get to write off their intrest.

People that own farms get a special tax break.

Would you like to browse the tax code and see how many special tax breaks there are and get back with that lil union tax break bitchy poo.?

That is one of the problems with this POS bill -- it is just a series of special deals and will do absolutely jack shit to slow the growth in the cost of health care. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Agreed!

[FONT= I am not for more government spending in anyway. FONT] Originally Posted by LonesomeDove

Well you sure defended Bush when he was claiming to keep you safe at night while blowing a TRILLION dollars on a war.

So I'm not quite sure what you just said is true,

Now, if in fact that was the case, that would be objective., But it isn't. The "Cadillac tax" provision (i.e., a tax on plans that cost over $23,000/yr) wasn't supposed to even go into effect until 2013, which would have given plenty of time to renegotiate plans. But the unions didn't even like that so the cut themselves a deal to get exempted until 2017 (an probably annually thereafter) and to exclude vision and dental coverage from their calculations.

That is one of the problems with this POS bill -- it is just a series of special deals and will do absolutely jack shit to slow the growth in the cost of health care. Originally Posted by pjorourke

If you count his entire post it was 4 sentences LOL Originally Posted by discreetgent

Even you should see the emphasis that was placed by me which draws one to what is relevant. What PJ wrote that clarified my points were two sentences, not his entire post, hence the use of underline, bold and italics.

Even you should see the emphasis that was placed by me which draws one to what is relevant. What PJ wrote that clarified my points were two sentences, not his entire post, hence the use of underline and bold and italics. Originally Posted by LonesomeDove

You still have not answered the irony of supporting the Republican spending what could wind up 1-3 TRILLION dollars.

Akin to RK walkway over a street IMHO. A waste of money.

Well you sure defended Bush when he was claiming to keep you safe at night while blowing a TRILLION dollars on a war.

So I'm not quite sure what you just said is true, Originally Posted by WTF

I was not defending Bush, just stating the facts that under Bush after September 11, 2001, we were safe. Nowhere in this thread, or on this site, have I ever stated I supported the reasons for being in the Iraqi War or Bush for putting us there. I was in the first Persian Gulf war and did not think we should have invaded back in 1991 just like I was against it in 2003.

You still have not answered the irony of supporting the Republican spending what could wind up 1-3 TRILLION dollars.

Akin to RK walkway over a street IMHO. A waste of money. Originally Posted by WTF

Yes, I have but one has to be able to understand the written word to know where I stand on matters like this.

-----

You are making assumptions that are false WTF. I suggest re-reading what I wrote and spending a little more time understanding what I posted before you write something like you did.

Sorry bout the caps. I don't see you bitching about bank tax breaks Originally Posted by WTF

A what break is that?

People that own homes get to write off their intrest.

That actually wrong. The general principle is that all interest is deductible (because it is income to someone else). The exception is that non-real estate related interest or real estate interest on loans above $1Million AREN'T deductible. Letting me keep my money is not a break.

People that own farms get a special tax break.

An interest group with WAY too much influence for its size -- farming is <5% of GDP.

Would you like to browse the tax code and see how many special tax breaks there are and get back with that lil union tax break bitchy poo.?

Granted -- its packed with them and thats a disgrace. Flat tax baby!

I was not defending Bush, just stating the facts that under Bush after September 11, 2001, we were safe. Nowhere in this thread, or on this site, have I ever stated I supported the reasons for being in the Iraqi War or Bush for putting us there. I was in the first Persian Gulf war and did not think we should have invaded back in 1991 just like I was against it in 2003. Originally Posted by LonesomeDove

If Jimmy the Peanut Farmer wasn''t such a wuss and had kicked the shit out of that area way back in the late 70's, Iraq I and II wouldn't have been necessary, nor would there have been a 9-11.

A buddy just sent this:

Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution:

"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."

Letting me keep my money is not a break.

Originally Posted by pjorourke

Then what was Ansley bitching about? That is what the unions were doing. Thrying to keep their money out of the governments hands.

Isn't life just one big political game? Ans questions unions getting a tax break because she is not affiliated with unions. When people she may have an affection (read big business) for get tax breaks....they are just keeping their own money.

[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]I was not defending Bush, just stating the facts that under Bush after September 11, 2001, we were safe.

: Originally Posted by LonesomeDove

Please, implying that Bush kept us safe is like giving credit to the rooster for making the sun rise. You did do that did you not?

Were you not indirectly implying that Obama can not keep us safe.

Did you not state that Obama was not your President? Let's not try and re write what you implied.

Ok you weren't for the wars, yet you slam Obama and through implied wording praise Bush.

Maybe we need to re think causal.

You imply something, then comeback and question my interpertation. Fair enough but that will begat other questions.

Then what was Ansley bitching about? That is what the unions were doing. Thrying to keep their money out of the governments hands. Originally Posted by WTF

To some extent yes, but what they wanted was to be treated more favorably than everyone else. Thats the objection.

LD you have managed 2 rather novel feats today; the first I already mentioned. The second is you have WTF and myself on the same side of a discussion (ok, when it comes to politics it isn't that rare lol)

To some extent yes, but what they wanted was to be treated more favorably than everyone else. Thats the objection. Originally Posted by pjorourke

I am not a union man....that said, to the victors go the spoils!


A tax break that one company gets that another company does not is favorably treatment.

I listened to their reasoning and it made sense, even though I do not think they should get it, I understand everyone thinks their cause special and worthy of special treatment.

Ansley , the answer to your union question is that everyone wants special treatment in one form or another. The people that are calling for fairness are usually the ones out of power. They are never as generious about fairness when IN power.