• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2012 Community Thread |OT2| This thread title is now under military control

Status
Not open for further replies.

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
Kosmo is all for government spending and taxation as long as he feels he will get a net benefit out of it. He pays in, so he rationalizes that it's ok to take out. He isn't "dependent" he is paying for a service.

I think it's kind of a cowardly stance personally.

Is this the "get government out of my medicare" rationale?
 

DynamicG

Member
What I am saying is that government handouts, in all forms, create a level of dependence and expectation of what the government should do for you.

Yup. Some people are likely to become dependent and expectant. Under your premise, which is clearly purely ideological otherwise you'd actually acknowledge the complexity of these concepts, there should be no government assistance at all.

Right, we've established your position. Is there any compromise in there?
 

Guileless

Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
Pres. Franklin Roosevelt said "continued dependence" on relief induces "spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber." Pres. Clinton made similar arguments in favor of his welfare reform policies.
 

eznark

Banned
Pres. Franklin Roosevelt said "continued dependence" on relief induces "spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber." Pres. Clinton made similar arguments in favor of his welfare reform policies.

Yeah, I'm willing to bet that Clinton's USDA would never go on a marketing spree to get more people onto food stamps using dodgy-at-best claims of healthier living through handouts.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
You don't think there might be a confounding variable there?

Oh I understand that there are heavy situational factors as well, but it still makes absolutely no sense to claim that going on food stamps can somehow be connected to weight loss and improved diet.
 

Guileless

Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
The most objectionable character I've encountered in this area is a farmer who 1) takes who knows how much in government subsidies, is rich and lives a life of Billy Madisonesque indolence, and 2) bought food stamps from his field hands for pennies on the dollar so they could use the money to buy alcohol.
 

eznark

Banned
The weight loss angle is pretty odd. But isn't improved diet--or rather, some kind of diet at all--the whole point of food stamps? Like, we're pushing them to spend more on food (paternalism! Kosmo's favorite) rather than whatever they want to buy.

I think you need to listen to the ads, the one with the two old women in particular, to really get it. It's coming across as a supplemental wellness program that everyone should be taking advantage of. It isn't at all being advertised as something to feed the poor.
 

Kosmo

Banned
The weight loss angle is pretty odd. But isn't improved diet--or rather, some kind of diet at all--the whole point of food stamps? Like, we're pushing them to spend more on food (paternalism! Kosmo's favorite) rather than whatever they want to buy.

The greatest testament to the greatness of our country is that our poor people are fat and have cell phones. I forget which comedian said that, might have been Carlin.
 

Chumly

Member
The difference between poor people getting our tax money, and everybody else getting our tax money, is that poor people aren't virtuous.

If you drill down, that really does seem to be what it comes to.
It's sad when people are considered less virtuous than corporations. There are many companies that don't pay income taxes therefore republicans should consider them on the same level as food stamp and welfare people since they have no "skin in the game". They should be more than willing to close tax loopholes on those companies right?
 

Gray Man

Banned
Hello PoliGaf! Long time lurker here, finally got validated the other day.

I haven't been terribly up to speed with things but I do have a question I'm confused about. Is "Obamacare" going to be a tax now? I'm generally for it, but I've got some conservative/ moderate just not a fan of the government relatives who are freaked out beyond belief "I don't care what the Supreme Court says its unconstitutional" kind of afraid -_-. Including my Father, and Grandparents.

How can I better explain to them why this isn't the devil's work, and if you think it is, I would love to hear your thoughts on why.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Hello PoliGaf! Long time lurker here, finally got validated the other day.

I haven't been terribly up to speed with things but I do have a question I'm confused about. Is "Obamacare" going to be a tax now? I'm generally for it, but I've got some conservative/ moderate just not a fan of the government relatives who are freaked out beyond belief "I don't care what the Supreme Court says its unconstitutional" kind of afraid -_-. Including my Father, and Grandparents.

How can I better explain to them why this isn't the devil's work, and if you think it is, I would love to hear your thoughts on why.

It depends on what you're talking about. If you're talking about the mandate to buy insurance specifically then that was interpreted by the Supreme Court to be a tax, but as long as you have health insurance you don't need to pay it. So if your relatives have health insurance and think that the ACA is directly going to cause their taxes to go up, they're wrong.
Kosmo posted a list a few pages back of other tax increases or changes, pretty much exclusively on industry, that are being used to pay for the program, but I doubt that was what your relatives were talking about and some of the ones the list mentioned are of dubious validity.
 
The greatest testament to the greatness of our country is that our poor people are fat and have cell phones. I forget which comedian said that, might have been Carlin.
Being fat isn't necessarily as sign of being content in our society, maybe it is in Africa or east Asia. Being fat here means poorer people do not have access to healthy foods, but instant access to McDonalds, BK and KFC.
 

RDreamer

Member
The greatest testament to the greatness of our country is that our poor people are fat and have cell phones. I forget which comedian said that, might have been Carlin.

Poor people being fat isn't a testament to the greatness of anything. Our corn subsidies basically make shitty food cheap and abundant. The working conditions of our poor also mean that they don't have as much time to shop around, cook their own food, or just generally avoid the fast food places. When you live in a system where you have to work 2 full time jobs to be able to afford to support your family, especially because there's no guaranteed access to health care what exactly are you supposed to do? You can't go to the grocery store and pick up stuff and then cook it when you've got only a precious hour or two between those jobs. And aside from that our entire culture is based on doing things quickly and cheaply. It's really no surprise that we don't value anything in our food besides what's quick and cheap. As a country we pay far less per person than most other countries do for our food. That's because it's cheap, and that doesn't just mean dollar-wise cheap. You get what you pay for. Now any time you try and reverse these sorts of things people cry out about their freedoms and how they love being fat or whatever. Hell, just trying to educate people nowadays on this stuff gets you labeled as an elitist trying to take away someone's donuts.
 

Diablos

Member
I think the only age group he lost was seniors, and contrary to the popular meme, they're not actually the largest voting group - that would be 50-64, who made up 26% of the 2008 electorate.

Obama's up 5 on gallup again. Wocka wocka doo doo yeah.

GALLUP DAILY

Jun 29-Jul 1, 2012 – Updates daily at 1 p.m. ET; reflects one-day change

Obama Approval46%-2
Obama Disapproval47%+1

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

Obama48%+1
Romney43%-1

7-day rolling average

----------------

Down 2, up 1 (or 5 or whatever).

WOOOO!

Doomed, not doomed!
 

GTI Guy

Member
It depends on what you're talking about. If you're talking about the mandate to buy insurance specifically then that was interpreted by the Supreme Court to be a tax, but as long as you have health insurance you don't need to pay it. So if your relatives have health insurance and think that the ACA is directly going to cause their taxes to go up, they're wrong.
Kosmo posted a list a few pages back of other tax increases or changes, pretty much exclusively on industry, that are being used to pay for the program, but I doubt that was what your relatives were talking about and some of the ones the list mentioned are of dubious validity.

Additional clarity...if you can afford health care insurance and you elect to opt out of it you may be penalized (taxed) for making the decision to not insure yourself. People who cannot afford health insurance would not incur the penalty (tax). In fact there are tax credits for purchasing health care insurance so this is more of a tax cut vs a tax increase. It should also be noted that in Mass where Rmoney put the same program into place about 1% of the population paid the penalty (tax).
 

Kosmo

Banned
Being fat isn't necessarily as sign of being content in our society, maybe it is in Africa or east Asia. Being fat here means poorer people do not have access to healthy foods, but instant access to McDonalds, BK and KFC.

Actually, you can eat healthy at McDs - just not with a Big Mac, fries, and 40oz non-diet soda. They have salads, grilled chicken, apples, etc.
 

Diablos

Member
Additional clarity...if you can afford health care insurance and you elect to opt out of it you may be penalized (taxed) for making the decision to not insure yourself. People who cannot afford health insurance would not incur the penalty (tax). In fact there are tax credits for purchasing health care insurance so this is more of a tax cut vs a tax increase. It should also be noted that in Mass where Rmoney put the same program into place about 1% of the population paid the penalty (tax).
Are you who I think you are?!

"Mitt Rmoney" (our money)

lol
 
Romney's camp refuses to call the mandate a tax, interesting. Of course, Romney is on record calling his own MA mandate a tax lol. I guess they want to avoid the conversation altogether, even if it means scrapping the Kosmo approved "biggest tax OF ALL TIME" angle
 

Diablos

Member
I can't believe the conservatives were going to throw the whole thing out. No one expected that.

I also can't believe I have respect for Roberts. He really put his ass on the line to uphold this thing. I wonder if this is going to cause a rift in the court between himself and the rest of the conservative judges? I get the impression that he and Kennedy are not exactly on good terms at the moment.
 

GTI Guy

Member
Romney's camp refuses to call the mandate a tax, interesting. Of course, Romney is on record calling his own MA mandate a tax lol. I guess they want to avoid the conversation altogether, even if it means scrapping the Kosmo approved "biggest tax OF ALL TIME" angle

Not only of all time. But "history of the world" yes I actually heard this...
 

ToxicAdam

Member
GALLUP DAILY

Down 2, up 1 (or 5 or whatever).

WOOOO!

Doomed, not doomed!

if you draw a straight line through the RCP aggregate polling (for the past two months) you will see a pretty defined 4 point lead. I think that's going to hold up all the way until November.

I think after the conventions, I will make a prediction thread. Just for shits and giggles.
 

Guileless

Temp Banned for Remedial Purposes
My anecdotal evidence suggests the stigma about accepting government aid is much rarer with young people than among those who can remember the 60s. I have encountered young parents (from families who are more likely than not hostile to Pres. Obama in the "keep your government out of my medicare" sense) who actually live apart to make it easier to qualify for various types of government aid. Some may even start out this way in good faith with the intention to keep it short just until they get on their feet, but living apart almost always means they each find other romantic partners and move on as they grow apart. They either don't know or don't care about the litany of long term problems and challenges that they are making more likely for themselves and their children.

Lets say you were presented with a group of twenty unmarried couples who were both 18-20 and new parents. You give them two options:

1) live apart and receive gov. subsidies for food

2) move in together to raise the child and forego cell phones and cable tv to better afford food

I would make #1 the favorite at -5.5 couples.
 

GTI Guy

Member
My anecdotal evidence suggests the stigma about accepting government aid is much rarer with young people than among those who can remember the 60s. I have encountered young parents (from families who are more likely than not hostile to Pres. Obama in the "keep your government out of my medicare" sense) who actually live apart to make it easier to qualify for various types of government aid. Some may even start out this way in good faith with the intention to keep it short just until they get on their feet, but living apart almost always means they each find other romantic partners and move on as they grow apart. They either don't know or don't care about the litany of long term problems and challenges that they are making more likely for themselves and their children.

Lets say you were presented with a group of twenty unmarried couples who were both 18-20 and new parents. You give them two options:

1) live apart and receive gov. subsidies for food

2) move in together to raise the child and forego cell phones and cable tv to better afford food

I would make #1 the favorite at -5.5 couples.

So food stamps cause divorce?
 
if you draw a straight line through the RCP aggregate polling (for the past two months) you will see a pretty defined 4 point lead. I think that's going to hold up all the way until November.

I think after the conventions, I will make a prediction thread. Just for shits and giggles.

Dunno about all that, but it's clear Obama has started pulling away over the last few weeks, despite the media narrative of him having a horrible month. He certainly had a couple bad weeks, but they weren't nearly as bad as advertised (even by me).

The Bain stuff is sinking Romney, and so far he's been unwilling to announce any new ideas or specific plans on anything. Hell, today's bad manufacturing news would be the perfect time for Romney to embrace Santorum's manufacturing tax cut idea
 

Gray Man

Banned
Have you looked at a McDonald's salad lately? It's far from healthy.

I have, and I"m sure they aren't the healthiest in the world, but those salads aren't bad and a great alternative to a "Big Mac" Wendy's makes a lot of their salads right there on the spot.

I feel little sympathy for people who chose to eat and live unhealthy lifestyles.
 

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
I have, and I"m sure they aren't the healthiest in the world, but those salads aren't bad and a great alternative to a "Big Mac" Wendy's makes a lot of their salads right there on the spot.

You know what's a great alternative to McDonald's burgers? Nearly everything.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
I have, and I"m sure they aren't the healthiest in the world, but those salads aren't bad and a great alternative to a "Big Mac" Wendy's makes a lot of their salads right there on the spot.

I feel little sympathy for people who chose to eat and live unhealthy lifestyles.

I find it hard to deny the effects that environment, media, and culture can have on personal choice. Unfortunately we are not beings of perfect lucid free will.
 

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
Hello PoliGaf! Long time lurker here, finally got validated the other day.

I haven't been terribly up to speed with things but I do have a question I'm confused about. Is "Obamacare" going to be a tax now? I'm generally for it, but I've got some conservative/ moderate just not a fan of the government relatives who are freaked out beyond belief "I don't care what the Supreme Court says its unconstitutional" kind of afraid -_-. Including my Father, and Grandparents.

How can I better explain to them why this isn't the devil's work, and if you think it is, I would love to hear your thoughts on why.

I assume you already knew that the health care law mandates everyone have health insurance, right? And that under the bill, if you choose to not purchase health insurance, the government will charge you a monetary fine as punishment, and you'll still be without insurance. You already knew this, right?

Nothing has changed. The court just said that's a constitutional thing for congress to do under Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the constitution, which says "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises."

It's a prohibitive tax used to discourage individuals from being uninsured.

This fine is legally the same thing as a tax, just like the penalty you pay for a parking ticket.

Because the word "tax" is a boogeyman, the legislation calls it a penalty/fine/fee, but it's conceptually the same thing. Always has been.

Tell your family that without this mandate, people can go uninsured and use the ER for free when medical needs arise. Now, they will be unable to freeload off of others, because they will have to contribute to their usage of emergency services. That's what the fines go towards.

Let me reiterate: If you have health insurance, you're not being taxed.

Why are people still so uninformed about even the basics of the law? It's been 2 years FFS
 

Kosmo

Banned
They certainly have those things. I don't know if either of you know the caloric content or nutritional value of them, however.

Hey, why not look at it together:

http://nutrition.mcdonalds.com/getnutrition/nutritionfacts.pdf

All of their salads with grilled chicken would qualify as pretty healthy in my book. Now you add in "crispy" (i.e. fried) chicken and drench them in Ranch, you might have another story. Their oatmeal at breakfast is good and healthy as well.

Don't tell me you can't eat healthy there, you can.
 

Kosmo

Banned
Nothing has changed. The court just said that's a constitutional thing for congress to do under Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the constitution, which says "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises."

What are your thoughts on the Enumerated Powers Act?
 

Gray Man

Banned
You think you're being a smart ass right now, but you just succinctly proved my point. Thanks.

Good job, good effort.

I honest to god just thought you wanted the nutritional value, no smart ass intentions at all. I was actually surprised how easy it was to find...
 
I honest to god just thought you wanted the nutritional value, no smart ass intentions at all. I was actually surprised how easy it was to find...

Ah ok. Sorry, my man.


Hey, why not look at it together:

http://nutrition.mcdonalds.com/getnutrition/nutritionfacts.pdf

All of their salads with grilled chicken would qualify as pretty healthy in my book. Now you add in "crispy" (i.e. fried) chicken and drench them in Ranch, you might have another story. Their oatmeal at breakfast is good and healthy as well.

Don't tell me you can't eat healthy there, you can.

Low-cal, does not mean healthy. All of those salads have a pretty low nutritional value, meaning that , "yes, you can eat a low calorie meal at McDonalds," but no, you cannot "eat healthy" at McDonalds.

You can get a lot of sodium if you like, however.
 

gcubed

Member
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-02/christie-prods-lawmakers-to-turn-tax-increase-into-cut

Seems like Christie joined the "cut taxes, infinite revenue" camp.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie kicked off a special legislative session he ordered by asking Democrats to replace their proposed tax increase on millionaires with a cut.

Christie, a first-term Republican, said he conditionally vetoed a Democratic-sponsored measure that would have raised the tax rate on income of $1 million or more. That move let him amend the bill and return it to lawmakers for concurrence. His changes would turn that increase into a tax reduction.

“A bipartisan tax-cut plan is on all of your desks right now,” Christie, 49, told lawmakers today. “Let’s show our state we can work together and finish the job before we leave for this holiday weekend.”

Democrats, who control the Legislature, wanted to use the millionaire’s tax to pay for credits against local property-tax bills. Christie, who faces re-election in 2013, is seeking to fund a tax cut without increasing any levies.

The governor and lawmakers spent most of June locked in a battle over Christie’s proposal to lower income taxes across the board by 10 percent over three years. Democrats said that plan favored the rich. They sent Christie a budget on June 25 that swapped his income-tax cut for a property-tax credit that was conditional on revenue meeting the governor’s projections.

Tax Plan
Christie said that plan held “tax relief hostage.” He signed the budget on June 29 after erasing $361 million in Democratic spending initiatives, including $50 million of income-tax credits for the working poor.

“Let’s open the board, vote for a middle-class tax cut and show that bipartisanship is alive and well in New Jersey,” Christie said to lawmakers. “I have come to the center of the room and agreed to the Senate Democratic tax plan. Will you join me?”

The governor has traveled the state to tout what he calls a “Jersey Comeback” that will allow the state to ramp up spending and lower taxes. The budget he proposed in February for the fiscal year that began July 1 counted on a 7.2 percent boost in revenue, the second-most hopeful projection after California’s, according to the National Governors Association.

Treasurer Andrew Sidamon-Eristoff, a Christie appointee, has since said that revenue through June 2013 may be $700 million less than Christie’s target, while the Legislature’s chief budget analyst has said the gap may be almost twice that.

I dont get the quote of "i've come to the center of the room and agreed to the senate democratic tax plan, will you join me" when he remove $350 million in spending and changed a paid for property tax relief from a millionaires tax into an across the board cut. I'm sure he left the title of the page there I guess
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom