July 4th Tea Party

I bet it'll be as effective as all those idiots who put magnets on their car supporting a cause.

6a00c225264172549d00f48cf0ff9f0003-320pi


~HotShotX
 
Or like those $$$$$$s who sign every one of their posts with their name when it's right next to their posts already, right, HotShot$$$$$$X?

~LIQUID fuckIN' 2
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Msut77']Guess you struck a nerve hotshot.[/QUOTE]

Must have hit it pretty close to the mark to get her all riled up like that, huh, kid?
 
[quote name='camoor']Must have hit it pretty close to the mark to get her all riled up like that, huh, kid?[/QUOTE]

She's been hawking my posts like some sort of jilted lover for a few months now. I don't know what's up with that.

~HotShotX
 
[quote name='HotShotX']She's been hawking my posts like some sort of jilted lover for a few months now. I don't know what's up with that.

~HotShotX[/QUOTE]

I also want to know what word in her post was censored. CAG doesn't censor too many words...
 
[quote name='camoor']I also want to know what word in her post was censored. CAG doesn't censor too many words...[/QUOTE]

Probably $$$$er, which is ironic enough since my avatar makes it pretty clear I'm white.

~HotShotX
 
It just doesn't matter when the majority of people don't think we're even taxed enough already. There's even people like Myke who think we shouldn't even be entitled to keep what we earn because wealth is really owned by the common good.

These futile protests serve no real purpose when we churn out morally bankrupt youth who don't believe in private property to begin with. Go to as many tea parties as you want but it won't change the fact that people think sustenance is a basic human right that must be provided by the collective.
 
[quote name='HotShotX']She's been hawking my posts like some sort of jilted lover for a few months now. I don't know what's up with that.

~HotShotX[/QUOTE]

Join the club, its actual posts are few and far between.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']It just doesn't matter when the majority of people don't think we're even taxed enough already. There's even people like Myke who think we shouldn't even be entitled to keep what we earn because wealth is really owned by the common good.

These futile protests serve no real purpose when we churn out morally bankrupt youth who don't believe in private property to begin with. Go to as many tea parties as you want but it won't change the fact that people think sustenance is a basic human right that must be provided by the collective.[/QUOTE]

Sustenance, schmustenance. At this point in time the average American feels entitled to at least a 35" plasma, eating out at least three times a week and the right to change their decisions on things like ARMs when they prove to be poor ones.
 
[quote name='Koggit']dumb

though i'm pretty pissed about cap & trade[/QUOTE]

Oh, now, what could possibly be wrong about a bill that lets one private company pollute my property while paying the government for the right to do so? :)

[quote name='HotShotX']I bet it'll be as effective as all those idiots who put magnets on their car supporting a cause.[/QUOTE]

I want one of those magnets.
Anyway, has anyone ever seen Invader Zim? My wife and I enjoy it - there's an episode where Zim goes around stealing human organs so he'll be able to convince the school nurse he's human. When Dib tells Zim his plan won't work, Zim says "Nonsense. More organs means more human!"

One day, my wife and I were passed by an SUV with about four million of those little magnets and some stickers on the back of the vehicle. I looked at my wife and said "More ribbons means more American!" ;)
 
[quote name='UncleBob']I want one of those magnets.
Anyway, has anyone ever seen Invader Zim? My wife and I enjoy it - there's an episode where Zim goes around stealing human organs so he'll be able to convince the school nurse he's human. When Dib tells Zim his plan won't work, Zim says "Nonsense. More organs means more human!"

One day, my wife and I were passed by an SUV with about four million of those little magnets and some stickers on the back of the vehicle. I looked at my wife and said "More ribbons means more American!" ;)[/QUOTE]

I love that episode. Especially because he's about to burst but when the nurse checks him out she can't believe how healthy he is, being that he has 5 hearts, 12 lungs, 8 spleens, etc.

What a great show. I'm perplexed as to how it came to be, and I'm also perplexed as to how Nickleodeon fumbled such cult classic greatness.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Oh, now, what could possibly be wrong about a bill that lets one private company pollute my property while paying the government for the right to do so? :)[/QUOTE]
i wouldn't care about that if it weren't a regressive tax
 
[quote name='camoor']I also want to know what word in her post was censored. CAG doesn't censor too many words...[/QUOTE]

I was going to say $$$$ers, $$$$as or fuckers. Possibly, Liquid2 edited the word on his or her own.
 
[quote name='Koggit']i wouldn't care about that if it weren't a regressive tax[/QUOTE]

Doesn't cap and trade cost practically nothing to the average consumer?

I've heard the $3000 extra in energy bills per year was BS.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Sustenance, schmustenance. At this point in time the average American feels entitled to at least a 35" plasma, eating out at least three times a week and the right to change their decisions on things like ARMs when they prove to be poor ones.[/QUOTE]

When my wife gives me a wish list of things to buy, I occasionally suggest going bankrupt so we can get out of debt faster.

MOC: Are you serious?

FOC: No.

It is a shame. Part of me wants to work harder and smarter to get ahead in life, but that damn reset button gets more attractive every year.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']When my wife gives me a wish list of things to buy, I occasionally suggest going bankrupt so we can get out of debt faster.

MOC: Are you serious?

FOC: No.

It is a shame. Part of me wants to work harder and smarter to get ahead in life, but that damn reset button gets more attractive every year.[/QUOTE]

And then they talk (seriously) about things like cramdown and "onerous" bankruptcy law that makes it so tough on the scum that leech off society and then throw their hands up when it comes time to pay the bills.
 
Ended up hangin' out with some friends and didn't go. Oh well.

[quote name='HotShotX']She's been hawking my posts like some sort of jilted lover for a few months now. I don't know what's up with that.

~HotShotX[/QUOTE]It's because it's absolutely retarded how you sign your posts when your name is immediately to the left of it.

[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']I was going to say $$$$ers, $$$$as or fuckers. Possibly, Liquid2 edited the word on his or her own.[/QUOTE]

None of the above, and no, I didn't.
 
I'm pretty sure he/she wrote was perez hilton said to the black eyed pea.

Also, way to show the man! Hangin' out with your friends!

Why are these protests taking place after a president who just lowered taxes for 95% of America steps into office?
 
[quote name='HowStern']Why are these protests taking place after a president who just lowered taxes for 95% of America steps into office?[/QUOTE]

Perhaps because that extra $10 on your paycheck isn't much compared to an Obama-supported energy tax of $71,000+ per family over a decade, not to mention the huge indirect taxes that would come about if the Senate stupidly voted the way the House did to destroy our economy by passing Waxman-Markey? Or a tax on health care benefits that's now being proposed? Or whatever other tax they come up with to service the doubling of our national debt -- the path embarked upon by our idiot Congress and Obama (Bush helped it along the way with the first "stimulus" that didn't work and TARP)?
 
^lol at the foxnews numbers.

First it was $3,000 a family annually for the energy plan now they are saying $71,00 a family per decade?

That's cute. Maybe 2% of Americans are in a tax bracket high enough to see that kind of increase. Maybe.

I think the healthcare benefit tax is Obama's way of saying "Look it, retards. If you don't pass my health care reform bill our health care industry is going to bankrupt us. (Because it is. We are spending three times as much per person than France, who has the highest rated healthcare service in the world) So, I'm going to have to start taxing it."

Do I think it will actually happen if the health care reform bill doesn't pass? Not a chance in the long. But Fox News is going ot take it and run.
 
the problem is it isn't the top 2% of americans that are feeling the pain of cap&trade... where i am vs hometown:

City: Seattle
Avg Family Income of City: $62,000
Currently Energy Bill: $30/month
Energy Type: Green (92% hydro)

City: Charenton, LA
Avg Family Income of City: $30,000
Current Energy Bill: $250+/mo
Energy Type: Some CO2 (nat. gas)

who's being taxed more...

the poor.

most big cities have cleaner energy (obviously, they can afford to invest more in energy infrastructure), higher income, and lower energy bills... cap & trade is gonna be felt most by low income rural folks, where, due to few customers per plant, coal is the only sensible economic choice. and there are tax credits, sure, but they're not gonna cover shit, it's a bandaid to treat buttrape and it's just not enough.

not to mention doling out these 'credits' is basically just welcoming corruption. whether the committee chooses to let 'gifts' affect their distribution of credits or they pick-and-choose based on their own investments (e.g. Nancy Pelosi wants to protect her California investments in green energy so she's stingy with California plants, to hurt them & help her)... it's giving people who have proven themselves to be terrible puppetmasters some powerful strings.


if they care so much about carbon, the better path would've been to raise the fed income tax and subsidize cleaning up our dirtiest plants... that keeps the tax progressive and removes the shady credit-distribution aspect.
 
I really like Krugman. He really explains things well and has fully formed arguments that clearly show he knows what he's talking about.
 
Not sure if you are serious. I would hope so, though, because you do know you don't get a nobel prize for being a blow hard who has no idea what you are talking about, right? Do you have one? Oh, you don't? Hm...Well, then. You sure are in a position to criticize someone who does...

Basically his reasoning behind why cap and trade will work is

One objection — the claim that carbon taxes are better than cap and trade — is, in my view, just wrong. In principle, emission taxes and tradable emission permits are equally effective at limiting pollution. In practice, cap and trade has some major advantages, especially for achieving effective international cooperation.
​
Not to put too fine a point on it, think about how hard it would be to verify whether China was really implementing a promise to tax carbon emissions, as opposed to letting factory owners with the right connections off the hook. By contrast, it would be fairly easy to determine whether China was holding its total emissions below agreed-upon levels.
​
The more serious objection to Waxman-Markey is that it sets up a system under which many polluters wouldn’t have to pay for the right to emit greenhouse gases — they’d get their permits free. In particular, in the first years of the program’s operation more than a third of the allocation of emission permits would be handed over at no charge to the power industry.
Now, these handouts wouldn’t undermine the policy’s effectiveness. Even when polluters get free permits, they still have an incentive to reduce their emissions, so that they can sell their excess permits to someone else. That’s not just theory: allowances for sulfur dioxide emissions are allocated to electric utilities free of charge, yet the cap-and-trade system for SO2 has been highly successful at controlling acid rain.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='HowStern']I don't know. Paul Krugman's article about it is pretty convincing.

http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/18/paul-krugman-waxman-markey-carbon-taxes-cap-and-trade/

He states why cap and trade will work and be better than a carbon tax. And, seeing as how he's a nobel prize winning economist, I believe him.[/QUOTE]

maybe i'm missing something... what i just read was "this bill sorta sucks, but it's better than a direct carbon tax. the worst part is that corrupt politicians will be bribed for credits."

which is part in support of what i said and part unrelated. i do not support a carbon tax, which krugman is arguing against, because that has the exact same problem as cap & trade: it's regressive. Tax Foundation and Warren Buffett agree... it's a regressive tax, rural customers have more carbon-heavy electricity, already pay the most for electricity, have lower income, and will see the largest increase in energy costs...
 
Why is it you are eager to believe that our representatives are looking out for our best interest in health care reform, but would quickly be open to corruption in the case of energy and pollution reform?
 
I think we are both missing something :p Because I didn't see that except for "It's not the best bill we could have gotten."

He doesn't state anything about being able to bribe politicians for permits? He states polluters will be able to sell their permits if they are able to meet the standards and no longer need them. If they can't meet the emission standards they will need the permit.

That is their incentive to improve. The money they can make. They will want to upgrade their facilities (creating jobs in the process) to meet emissions standards and have the ability to sell off the free permits with their new "greener" and cheaper energy. Like is available in bigger cities like you said.

And like Krugman says. The cap and trae on S02 has worked despite everyone claiming it would cripple the American power industry in 1990. But look at how it has worked
http://www.epa.gov/captrade/maps/so2.html
 
[quote name='HowStern']Not sure if you are serious. I would hope so, though, because you do know you don't get a nobel prize for being a blow hard who has no idea what you are talking about, right? Do you have one? Oh, you don't? Hm...Well, then. You sure are in a position to criticize someone who does...

Basically his reasoning behind why cap and trade will work is[/QUOTE]

I was being serious.
 
[quote name='HowStern']I think we are both missing something :p Because I didn't see that except for "It's not the best bill we could have gotten."

He doesn't state anything about being able to bribe politicians for permits? He states polluters will be able to sell their permits if they are able to meet the standards and no longer need them. If they can't meet the emission standards they will need the permit[/QUOTE]
he stated it in a pretty muted, low-key manner... but it's pretty blunt:
Krugman is more concerned about the allocations, although not for the reason you might think:

The more serious objection to Waxman-Markey is that it sets up a system under which many polluters wouldn’t have to pay for the right to emit greenhouse gases — they’d get their permits free. In particular, in the first years of the program’s operation more than a third of the allocation of emission permits would be handed over at no charge to the power industry.

Now, these handouts wouldn’t undermine the policy’s effectiveness. Even when polluters get free permits, they still have an incentive to reduce their emissions, so that they can sell their excess permits to someone else. That’s not just theory: allowances for sulfur dioxide emissions are allocated to electric utilities free of charge, yet the cap-and-trade system for SO2 has been highly successful at controlling acid rain.

But handing out emission permits does, in effect, transfer wealth from taxpayers to industry. So if you had your heart set on a clean program, without major political payoffs, Waxman-Markey is a disappointment.

Yes, the allocation is a disappointment to many, including me. But the pro-allocation forces had the political mojo. And so we move on.
Click to expand...

[quote name='HowStern']That is their incentive to improve. The money they can make. They will want to upgrade their facilities (creating jobs in the process) to meet emissions standards and have the ability to sell off the free permits with their new "greener" and cheaper energy. Like is available in bigger cities like you said.

And like Krugman says. The cap and trae on S02 has worked despite everyone claiming it would cripple the American power industry in 1990. But look at how it has worked
http://www.epa.gov/captrade/maps/so2.html[/QUOTE]

SO2 worked because it can be easily scrubbed from emissions... such is not the case of CO2
 
Ah, I took the payoff thing to mean about Pelosi. And her investments, etc. And any other politicans that applies to. Not so much as a bribe deal.
 
[quote name='HowStern']^lol at the foxnews numbers.

First it was $3,000 a family annually for the energy plan now they are saying $71,00 a family per decade?

That's cute. Maybe 2% of Americans are in a tax bracket high enough to see that kind of increase. Maybe.[/quote]

They aren't Fox News numbers. There are plenty of good analyses around that don't leave out most of the cost, like CBO did in their analysis that seemed so low. Here are a couple:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/energyandenvironment/wm2503.cfm
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/09-17-2007/0004664103&EDATE

And allow me to :lol: at your claim that only 2% of Americans in high tax brackets will see energy tax increases. The hardest hit will be the poor, who will have to choose between their prescription and driving to work, or between heating their house and eating. All to supposedly decrease temperatures by 0.1 degrees C by 2100. What a wonderful and reasonable trade-off!

[quote name='HowStern']I think the healthcare benefit tax is Obama's way of saying "Look it, retards. If you don't pass my health care reform bill our health care industry is going to bankrupt us. (Because it is. We are spending three times as much per person than France, who has the highest rated healthcare service in the world) So, I'm going to have to start taxing it."

Do I think it will actually happen if the health care reform bill doesn't pass? Not a chance in the long. But Fox News is going ot take it and run.[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure why you're so fixated on Fox News. They must be getting under your skin pretty well.

Our health care system needs reform. I think just about everyone agrees with that. The problem is that Obama's plan will increase costs, not decrease them (by $1.6 trillion using latest estimates). Therefore, saying that Obama's health care reform plan will fix our government's fiscal mess is either propaganda or idiocy.

And Paul Krugman called everyone who voted against this dreadful piece of legislation a "traitor to the planet." The small amount of respect I had for the honesty of his positions is now gone. So, Paul (and those who agree with him), who is a bigger traitor to the planet? Those who pretend this bill will do anything significant about carbon dioxide emissions in a vain attempt to get political brownie points or those who voted against it?
 
No way will health care reform cost us more. Like I said France does what Obama wants to do and they spend 3 times less than us per person. Not to mention they are the number 1 health care service in the world.

And I'm not believing those other numbers. It's the same song and dance that happened when S02 went under cap and trade. Like Koggit said it may be harder to c02 emissions than it was s02, but in my opinion, it needs to be done. We can't keep sucking at big oil's teet. We need renewable energy. It will be cheaper in the long run and safer.
 
[quote name='HowStern']No way will health care reform cost us more. Like I said France does what Obama wants to do and they spend 3 times less than us per person. Not to mention they are the number 1 health care service in the world.

And I'm not believing those other numbers. It's the same song and dance that happened when S02 went under cap and trade. Like Koggit said it may be harder to c02 emissions than it was s02, but in my opinion, it needs to be done. We can't keep sucking at big oil's teet. We need renewable energy. It will be cheaper in the long run and safer.[/QUOTE]

I completely agree HowStern. Its not only economical, we must reform the healthcare system for ethical reasons as well.

Yet the philosophy of No has gripped conservatives like never before. It's as if they think they can shoot down any plan that has the potential of costing the executive class a little more by prefacing their arguement with the magical 5 word phrase "The healthcare system needs reform but..." If Obamas plan really did hit the middle class as hard as ElP wants you to believe, he wouldn't be reelected - does anyone here think he's that politically naive?

I'll never get how hypocrites like ElPrincipe feel entitled to lecture us on the immorality of the pro-choice movement, but as soon as the baby is out of the vagina they argue against any plan that would guarantee its access to a base level of healthcare.
 
This cap and trade bill is a bunch of bullshit. No one was allowed to read the full bill until one copy was handed out about a hour before it was voted on to John Boehner. Not only will this bill be a complete invasion of privacy, with the required home energy audits, but you will be forced to only use government approved light fixtures and such. Plus this bill will kill the middle class, and the poor by raising their cost of living, and making it hard for them to afford food, (takes carbon based energy to make it, and transport it), heating and cooling (that ought to be great in Minnesota, you choose between heating in the winter, and going to work), and afford driving to work. This bill will also drive all carbon based energy jobs out of the US and into China, and other places, where there are no cap & trade laws. If you still think this bill is actually going to do something, other then kill jobs, and destroy the middle class, and the poor, just look at spain. They instituted a cap & trade system, lost 2.2 million jobs, but now they have some "green" jobs that cost something like $80,000 a piece.

On health care: I would hope that the Obama administration, and Congress doesn't decide to create a federal sales tax to pay for the health care reform, because that would only destroy the economy further, and destroy the middle class and poor.
 
The energy audits are for newly constructed houses only. Not families. There will be no invasion of privacy. It is to make sure all new houses built are built under the new standard. This will save people $$ due to the fact all new houses will be much more energy efficient.
 
fullmetalfan, I haven't read it and honestly don't know shit about the bill but those are some heavy statements. Could you source these for me?
Not only will this bill be a complete invasion of privacy, with the required home energy audits
Click to expand...
you will be forced to only use government approved light fixtures and such
Click to expand...
 
And no where in those 1,400+ pages will you find anything stating your current home will need to be audited or use government approved lighting fixtures in your house.

Like I said the audit is for construction companies and applies to all new houses being built. They must meet the new energy efficiency standard.

All this misinformation is what scares people away from moving forward with the things we need to do.
The devil you know, etc..
 
Jesus people, the euphemism is that ignorance is BLISS, not that ignorance is FEAR AND DISTRUST.

Ignorance - you're doing it wrong.
 
I welcome being taxed into oblivion.

If the wife has to choose between TV and heat, maybe she'll choose heat.

After TV has been cleaned out of her system for a few months and our ribs are showing through our clothes, maybe she'll figure out happiness is knowing what you need and taking it.

Then again, she might keep the TV humming. I'll just have to sneak food to the kids so she dies from starvation first.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Jesus people, the euphemism is that ignorance is BLISS, not that ignorance is FEAR AND DISTRUST.

Ignorance - you're doing it wrong.[/QUOTE]

I always have a hard time believing one singular act is going to destroy this country or our collective ridiculously wasteful lifestyle on purpose.

Of course, we know our representatives don't read the bills they vote on. Who really knows?
 
[quote name='HowStern']
All this misinformation is what scares people away from moving forward with the things we need to do.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, we totally need these new taxes. Especially the poor. We should keep taxing them, until they are forced to all live on the street. Then the middle class will become the poor, and we can just do the same thing to them. Keep raising the cost of living, and taxes, on people who can't pay them through this bill and a national sales tax.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top