Ron

If you are "in the poor house" you are already eligible for medicaid. So at least you finally admit that there *IS* HC in the US even if you are broke. Who said anything about sales tax????? I sure didn't. I DID say that consumer spending is 70% of GDP. You have said you want to tax people to take away their ability to spend till it fits YOUR acceptable level. Never mind that you would actually be killing the economy in the process. Really????? You are going to accuse OTHERS of that? What was this from you then: but I understand that conservative interpretation works like binary code; 1 or 0. Yes or no. All or nothing. Conservative thinking is often absolute Before you get all upset about someone doing something to you.... You might want to make sure you are not doing the EXACT same thing. Good. Just make sure to sell YOUR fun things and not mine. You seem to really want someone else to pay for your wants/needs. YOU want something.... YOU need to be willing to pay for it... With YOUR money. My GF bought private HC when she was unemployed. It was more important than making a few extra jumps, or going shopping. Again you want everything you want... but you want anyone but you to pay for it. No, your posts indicate you want a Cadillac paid for by someone else. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I never said I would... I said I could. I have the right to privacy... I guess you would surrender the 4th as fast as you do the 2nd? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

So hold them accountable. Fix the real problem, not just slap a made up solution on it. Did I say, "cut taxes, or did I say, "stimulate growth"? The same way you plan on getting tax hikes past "the rich". "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Yes, it is going nowhere, but only due to the fact you refuse to admit it already exists. So you think taxation should be so high as to prevent people from spending? Hate to break it to you, but consumer spending counts for 70% of GDP. So you want to tax people so they stop spending and kill the LARGEST driver of the economy? And I understand that liberals have to resort to personal attacks when they are proven wrong.... Just like that one. Face it... You made a statement that was in no way true.... Just accept it and move along. You could: 1. Get a job with HC... Many people do it. In fact, about 68% of Americans are happy with the HC they currently have and rate it "good" or "excellent". And 56% do not support this current push. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform 2. You could pay for it. Most people get loans for cars... I would think your health would be more important than a new car. And I bet you still spend money on "fun" things... Again, it is all about priorities. You want me to pay the boring stuff you want so you can spend your money on the cool things. Just like the packer at the DZ that was bitching about needing to see a Dr, but he "could not afford it". But he managed to have money to jump, he had money to buy a new canopy, he had money to take SCUBA lessons........ect. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Really????? The National Railroad Passenger Corporation, doing business as Amtrak (reporting mark AMTK), is a government-owned corporation. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

I have already answered that. It is not my fault you ignored it. I can prevent PEOPLE from coming into my home.... And that's for any reason I see fit. I don't think a company should be allowed to remove someones Constitutional rights. Do you think your company has the right to own slaves? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Nice try Bill. You favor punishing law abiding citizens from their rights in public places. Care to stick to the topic with lame strawmen? Yes, you have the right to prevent a person from doing almost anything in your home... But we are not talking about private property. Care to try to stay on task? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Or: 1. You cut wasteful spending. 2. You stimulate growth. 3. You eliminate loopholes. The answer is not always "hit the rich harder". And even if it is the final answer, it should not be the knee jerk initial default position. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Two can play your silly little game Bill. Good to see you still favor taking away citizens rights when they have done nothing wrong. Good to see that you think a gun will kill on its own so it must be prevented from being in some areas... "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Have you ever heard me say we should not pay taxes? Have you ever heard me say to tax the poor? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Like it or not, that is cherry picking the things you want and the things you don't. We currently have a baseline for HC... Medicaid covers anyone that truly can't pay and no hospital is allowed to turn away a person based on their ability to pay. They already do: http://www.american.com/archive/2007/november-december-magazine-contents/guess-who-really-pays-the-taxes The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per­cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare. The top 10% already pay 68%. The bottom 50% only pay 3%. Right here: The US was the bastion for class mobility, many foreigners would come her for that, now they realize it's piss. And you like to claim that the US does not provide opportunity... Of course we have already proven that you are incorrect. Or you could have: 1. Gotten a job that has dental benefits. My dental plan costs me about 30 bucks a year. 2. Paid for preventive care out of pocket such as two cleanings a year. If you look you can find cash deals for less than 100 bucks. http://www.affordabledentalcenter.com/new-patient-specials.html?gclid=CIS-1N2il50CFZla2godN0912A http://www.8coupons.com/discounts/progressive-dentistry-new-york-10016-212-725-1111#11143 So basically, you didn't want to pay for a cleaning and a checkup and now want others to pay for your more expensive procedures that are the result of your neglect. I am willing to bet that you have made more than 200 dollars worth of jumps this year, or drank more than 200 dollars worth of beverages, or ate out and spent more than 200 bucks this year. It is all about priorities... you want someone else to pay for your HC so you can spend your money on more fun things. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

So you want to cherry pick when things should be similar and when they are fine not to be? And only things that meet your approval should be similar? You stated that people do not have the ability to rise from poverty to greatness.... That is just not true and you just restating it is does not make it so. People still come to the US to escape other places. People still make a life here that they could not make in other places. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Incorrect, the pay the EXACT same percentage as the rest of us do till they reach the cap. And they get the EXACT same benefits. You only think that since you don't listen to them. There have been several suggestions given (cutting costs, reducing fraud, privatization), you just don't like them since they don't involve taxing the rich more. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Nope, I suggest you read it again. I can prevent PEOPLE from coming into my home.... And that's for any reason I see fit. I can ban ACTIONS in my home. Such as I don't let people smoke, but I don't ban cigarettes. Nope. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Where did I say that? Stop trying to put words in my mouth. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

That's not what you are saying at all. You want people with more money to have to pay more. That is not "similar", that is "different". They have a much better chance here than in most places. Obama as one example. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

He wants to punish a law abiding citizen by removing his right to carry for self defense in a public place. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Strawman... We are talking about a PUBLIC place, not a private residence. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

But in my example, no rights are violated. While I agree that there are times that guns should not be allowed (people with violent pasts, criminals, mentally unstable individuals...ect)... I tend to think that a citizen with no criminal or violent history that has training should be allowed to own pretty much whatever he wants. Also, I think that same person should be allowed to carry pretty much everywhere. Gun bans only hurt people who follow the law... The Ruby's attack in TX is a good example.. A nutjob with a violent past killed many innocent people while a citizen who had a gun left it in her car to obey the law. She could have easily taken out the shooter, but instead had to watch several people to include both her parents be killed. The law prevented her from defending her family, but it didn't do anything to prevent the attacker from carrying a gun. I tend to side with allowing rights to citizens as long as they don't affect innocents. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

A wonderful question... Yes, I do lock my doors (I didn't when I lived on the DZ in ZHills). The reason is simple... It is an easy way to prevent the casual thief. Yes, the pro could easily pick my lock and crack my safe and have a free run of the place provided I am not home. But I think your example is lacking. What harm or who's legal rights do I step on by locking my house? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Then he might very well have a better opinion as long as he actually understood the situation. Now John, Which physicist would be better to listen to: A whuffo physicist, or a physicist with 1,000 jumps? "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Bill you have stated that you support preventing law abiding citizens from having a weapon in certain places. You support bans which have been shown to not prevent criminals for having and using weapons. Bans only punish law abiding citizens since criminals don't obey the law. Therfore you DO support punishing people for things they didn't do. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Yes, it is a matter of opinion... More so it is the matter of an uneducated opinion vs an educated opinion. This was not a disagreement over semantics.. It may have started that way but it turned into an ignorant person trying to claim he knows more than an educated and experienced person. Add into it, you had to try to make it personal with your snide comments when you ran out of logic. Don't blame me for your inabilty to have a rational discussion without lame insults "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Oh, so you are ok with punishing people for things they didn't do. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

It means he is a much more likely to be right than some whuffo that happened to walk onto the DZ. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334