Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
If Romney is such a big expert, how come he doesn't understand why windows stay shut on an airplane?
Page <<first <prev 7 of 8 next>
Sep 28, 2012 15:33:17   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
Lou, I almost went to work for Local 692 back in 1980 as I was good friends with a couple of the organizers..Glad I didn't though. Some Unions may be good, but others are just fronts for organized crime...I know when I went to a few rallies what that Union was really all about & that is the reason for my stance to this day...They wanted me to be an "enforcer" if you know what I mean...

Hunter Lou 1947 wrote:
Screamin Scott wrote:
I got one for you Lou....If Unions are so great to work for, why are members forced to join? Doesn't sound very Democratic to me...What about freedom of choice? Then you have Unions trying to have everyone's vote on membership open & known to all ...What's that all about. Is this something we will be instituting in our countries General elections next? So they can intimidate those who vote against being Unionized?

Hunter Lou 1947 wrote:
Screamin Scott wrote:
Boy are you a crock full of shit...Neither parent was a Union member & I got nothing in any Will either. I was a Union member for 8 years & the Union didn't do shit for me except take my money...See. I can stoop to your level when I want too. Grow a life !

Hunter Lou 1947 wrote:
Screamin Scott wrote:
Tell me why Union's Health care plans were given a waiver by the Obama administration? Sounds like Good Old Boy politics to me...

Lancer W/A Canon wrote:
Blurryeyed wrote:
Lancer W/A Canon wrote:
rozarius wrote:
There has never been a more important presidential race than this one. I highly suggest that all you Obama-ites read the following and cast your vote very, very carefully.

From: John Porter
To: Americans everywhere
I was sitting at my keyboard halfway through my writing a letter to you about how Barack Obama was fulfilling his pledge to "Transform America" by "Changing the fundamentals of America ," so that our government would become the plantation, he the owner, and we the slaves, when this article by Steve McCann appeared in my in box. After checking it for accuracy, and finding it to be so, I put my writing on hold and here present it to you, for I could not say it better.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Obama's Second Term Transformation Plans

The 2012 election has often been described as the most pivotal since 1860.This statement is not hyperbole. If Barack Obama is re-elected the United States will never be the same, nor will it be able to re-capture its once lofty status as the most dominant nation in the history of mankind.
The overwhelming majority of Americans do not understand that Obama's first term was dedicated to putting in place executive power to enable him and the administration to fulfill the campaign promise of "transforming America " in his second term regardless of which political party controls Congress. That is why his re-election team is virtually ignoring the plight of incumbent or prospective Democratic Party office holders.
The most significant accomplishment of Obama's first term was to make Congress irrelevant. Under the myopic and blindly loyal leadership of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats have succeeded in creating an imperial and, in a second term, a potential dictatorial presidency.
During the first two years of the Obama administration when the Democrats overwhelming controlled both Houses of Congress and the media was in an Obama worshipping stupor, a myriad of laws were passed and actions taken which transferred virtually unlimited power to the executive branch.
The birth of multi-thousand page laws was not an aberration. This tactic was adopted so the bureaucracy controlled by Obama appointees would have sole discretion in interpreting vaguely written laws and enforcing thousands of pages of regulations they and not Congress would subsequently write.
For example, in the 2,700 pages of ObamaCare there are more than 2,500 references to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. There are more than 700 instances when he or she is instructed that they "shall" do something and more than 200 times when they "may" take at their sole discretion some form of regulatory action. On 139 occasions, the law mentions that the "Secretary determines." In essence one person, appointed by and reporting to the president, will be in charge of the health care of 310 million Americans once ObamaCare is fully operational in 2014.
The same is true in the 2,319 pages of the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act which confers nearly unlimited power on various agencies to control by fiat the nation's financial, banking and investment sectors. The bill also creates new agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, not subject to any oversight by Congress. This overall process was repeated numerous times with other legislation all with the intent of granting unfettered power to the executive branch controlled by Barack Obama and his radical associates.
Additionally, the Obama administration has, through its unilaterally determined rule making and regulatory powers, created laws out of whole cloth. The Environmental Protection Agency on a near daily basis issues new regulations clearly out of their purview in order to modify and change environmental laws previously passed and to impose a radical green agenda never approved by Congress. The same is true of the Energy and Interior Departments among many others.
None of these extra-constitutional actions have been challenged by Congress. The left in America knows this usurpation of power is nearly impossible to reverse unless stopped in its early stages.
It is clearly the mindset of this administration and its appointees that Congress is merely a nuisance and can be ignored after they were able to take full advantage of the useful idiots in the Democrat controlled House and Senate in 2009-2010 and the Democrat Senate in the current Congress.
Additionally, Barack Obama knows after his re-election a Republican controlled House and Senate will not be able to enact any legislation to roll back the power previously granted to the Executive Branch or usurped by them. His veto will not be overridden as there will always be at least 145 Democratic members of the House or 34 in the Senate in agreement with or intimidated by an administration more than willing to use Chicago style political tactics.
The stalemate between the Executive and Legislative Branches will inure to the benefit of Barack Obama and his fellow leftists.
The most significant power Congress has is the control of the purse-strings as all spending must be approved by them However,once re-elected, Barack Obama, as confirmed by his willingness to do or say anything and his unscrupulous re-election tactics,would not only threaten government shutdowns but would deliberately withhold payments to those dependent on government support as a means of intimidating and forcing a Republican controlled Congress to surrender to his demands, thus neutering their ability to control the administration through spending constraints.
Further, this administration has shown contempt for the courts by ignoring various court orders, e.g. the Gulf of Mexico oil drilling moratorium, as well as stonewalling subpoenas and requests issued by Congress. The Eric Holder Justice Department has become the epitome of corruption as part of the most dishonest and deceitful administration in American history. In a second term the arrogance of Barack Obama and his minions will become more blatant as he will not have to be concerned with re-election.
Who will be there to enforce the rule of law, a Supreme Court ruling or the Constitution? No one. Barack Obama and his fellow-travelers will be unchallenged as they run roughshod over the American people.
Many Republicans and conservatives dissatisfied with the prospect of Mitt Romney as the nominee for president are instead focused on re-taking the House and Senate. That goal, while worthy and necessary, is meaningless unless Barack Obama is defeated . The nation is not dealing with a person of character and integrity but someone of single-minded purpose and overwhelming narcissism. Judging by his actions, words and deeds during his first term, he does not intend to work with Congress,either Republican or Democrat in his second term but rather to force his radical agenda on the American people through the power he has usurped or been granted.
The governmental structure of the United States was set up by the founders in the hope that over the years only those people of high moral character and integrity would assume the reins of power. However, knowing that was not always possible, they dispersed power over three distinct and independent branches as a check on each other.
What they could not imagine is the surrender and abdication of its constitutional duty by the preeminent governmental branch, the Congress, to a chief executive devoid of any character or integrity coupled with a judiciary essentially powerless to enforce the law when the chief executive ignores them.
Conservatives, Libertarians, the Republican Party and Mitt Romney must come to grips with this moment in time and their historical role in denying Barack Obama and his minions their ultimate goal. All resources must be directed at that end-game and not merely controlling Congress and the various committee chairmanships.
Steve McCann
May 12, 2012
There has never been a more important presidential... (show quote)


Instead of reading this stuff above, which was "slightly " biased
and betting you won't check " the facts "

HealthCare.gov

Man up or Woman up and check for yourself . After all, it is your life. It is set up so you can easily go to what's important to you first , and then check the " FACTS " that were brought to you by these totally unbiased gentlemen.
quote=rozarius There has never been a more import... (show quote)


I would not necessarily call HealthCare.gov to be an unbiased source, that information is prepared and filtered through a communications group who are very careful in how information is disseminated to the public... It is interesting my brother's son-in-law was a spokes person for Health and Human services under the Obama administration and a couple of Thanksgivings back during the Haiti earthquake he was reading and what I could only characterize as censuring communications and releases from the CDC regarding the Colora and conditions in Haiti at the time, so even our scientific community communicating with another government is censured and their communications are made to fit a more politically acceptable agenda... I know that my niece's husband is no scientist, but he does have a background in PR and that was what was most important to the administration and that is why he was reading CDC communications before they were released.

It is really hard for me to take anything coming out of this administration at face value, they have changed our State Department fact sheets on foreign countries to reflect the Obama administrations policies, they have done the same with the presidential biographies, they have added paragraphs to presidents starting with Calvin Coolidge comparing their accomplishments with those of modern day Obama...

It is sad to say but our government is not necessarily a good source for information in this day in age.
quote=Lancer W/A Canon quote=rozarius There has ... (show quote)


That is the law for you to read, in all it's glory , and for you to see what's written .

Here, try this Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
quote=Blurryeyed quote=Lancer W/A Canon quote=r... (show quote)
Tell me why Union's Health care plans were given a... (show quote)


They haven't been favored. Your just anti-union. Your parents probably benefitted from a union pension but they didn't will you their benefits and now you are disgruntled.
quote=Screamin Scott Tell me why Union's Health c... (show quote)
Boy are you a crock full of shit...Neither parent... (show quote)


Reading some more of your ranting and it shows me you have the foggiest idea about being union.
quote=Screamin Scott Boy are you a crock full of... (show quote)
I got one for you Lou....If Unions are so great to... (show quote)


Well, you asked the question, now my answer: It's law in certain states you have to be full pledged union members. although you can become a dues objector and pay a partial dues rate based on what it costs the union to only represent you for being union for the union to do it's normal duties of policing the contract, etc.
Some states are commonly referred to as right to work states, meaning you don't have to belong to the union but the union still must represent you. Sort of being a free loader, like what Romney referred people to in his remarks. The union has to negoitate for you, go to arbitration for you, file grievances for you. It's really free loading in a sense. Not fair to the other employees at the shop who belong to the union and pay dues for union representation. It really does cause problems at negoiations because managements know how many people would actually strike when an agreement can't be agreed upon. Those not in the union must report for work and those on strike would be on the picket line.
Another question you brought up is that the union would be able to tell who voted for a union. That's a bull crap lie. In an election called for by the NLRB what that issue is all about is that the unions want a simple majority. Meaning that if we would get a simple majority of signers who want a union at a shop on a organizing drive then the company and those who signed for the union who created the majority would go into binding arbitration to try and reach an agreement between both sides. The way it is now in the non transportation side. If the members in a particular shop ask a union to do an organizing drive and this process gets at least 30% of the employees to sign a petition to form a union. That union must then petition the NLRB to hold a hearing and if an election is set then the union still must win that election by a simple majority. During this time frame up to the election the company can call captive audience meetings (mandatory meetings) and outside company co nsultants can be called in to try and get the employees not to vote for the union. In this process it becomes very difficult for unions to achieve a victory. Because in most part managements intimadate their employees in these meetings and outside of these meetings in the shop.
So it's not a good setting right off the bat for either side.
What the unions today want to have happen is that a more peacefull situation is developed where both sides mutually agree that they can bring about an atmosphere where it's a win win for both sides. I'll tell you today more unions are adapted to bringing about better productivity and building up a company then most people give them credit for. Yes, some employers need to be forced into a really hard nosed type situation but it need not be that way. Employees who have the sense that their employer cares about them and lets them form a union without a fight find out that it is for the better for both sides and better in the long run.
quote=Screamin Scott I got one for you Lou....If ... (show quote)

Reply
Sep 28, 2012 18:41:09   #
Hunter Lou 1947 Loc: Minnesota
 
Screamin Scott wrote:
Lou, I almost went to work for Local 692 back in 1980 as I was good friends with a couple of the organizers..Glad I didn't though. Some Unions may be good, but others are just fronts for organized crime...I know when I went to a few rallies what that Union was really all about & that is the reason for my stance to this day...They wanted me to be an "enforcer" if you know what I mean...

Hunter Lou 1947 wrote:
Screamin Scott wrote:
I got one for you Lou....If Unions are so great to work for, why are members forced to join? Doesn't sound very Democratic to me...What about freedom of choice? Then you have Unions trying to have everyone's vote on membership open & known to all ...What's that all about. Is this something we will be instituting in our countries General elections next? So they can intimidate those who vote against being Unionized?

Hunter Lou 1947 wrote:
Screamin Scott wrote:
Boy are you a crock full of shit...Neither parent was a Union member & I got nothing in any Will either. I was a Union member for 8 years & the Union didn't do shit for me except take my money...See. I can stoop to your level when I want too. Grow a life !

Hunter Lou 1947 wrote:
Screamin Scott wrote:
Tell me why Union's Health care plans were given a waiver by the Obama administration? Sounds like Good Old Boy politics to me...

Lancer W/A Canon wrote:
Blurryeyed wrote:
Lancer W/A Canon wrote:
rozarius wrote:
There has never been a more important presidential race than this one. I highly suggest that all you Obama-ites read the following and cast your vote very, very carefully.

From: John Porter
To: Americans everywhere
I was sitting at my keyboard halfway through my writing a letter to you about how Barack Obama was fulfilling his pledge to "Transform America" by "Changing the fundamentals of America ," so that our government would become the plantation, he the owner, and we the slaves, when this article by Steve McCann appeared in my in box. After checking it for accuracy, and finding it to be so, I put my writing on hold and here present it to you, for I could not say it better.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Obama's Second Term Transformation Plans

The 2012 election has often been described as the most pivotal since 1860.This statement is not hyperbole. If Barack Obama is re-elected the United States will never be the same, nor will it be able to re-capture its once lofty status as the most dominant nation in the history of mankind.
The overwhelming majority of Americans do not understand that Obama's first term was dedicated to putting in place executive power to enable him and the administration to fulfill the campaign promise of "transforming America " in his second term regardless of which political party controls Congress. That is why his re-election team is virtually ignoring the plight of incumbent or prospective Democratic Party office holders.
The most significant accomplishment of Obama's first term was to make Congress irrelevant. Under the myopic and blindly loyal leadership of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats have succeeded in creating an imperial and, in a second term, a potential dictatorial presidency.
During the first two years of the Obama administration when the Democrats overwhelming controlled both Houses of Congress and the media was in an Obama worshipping stupor, a myriad of laws were passed and actions taken which transferred virtually unlimited power to the executive branch.
The birth of multi-thousand page laws was not an aberration. This tactic was adopted so the bureaucracy controlled by Obama appointees would have sole discretion in interpreting vaguely written laws and enforcing thousands of pages of regulations they and not Congress would subsequently write.
For example, in the 2,700 pages of ObamaCare there are more than 2,500 references to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. There are more than 700 instances when he or she is instructed that they "shall" do something and more than 200 times when they "may" take at their sole discretion some form of regulatory action. On 139 occasions, the law mentions that the "Secretary determines." In essence one person, appointed by and reporting to the president, will be in charge of the health care of 310 million Americans once ObamaCare is fully operational in 2014.
The same is true in the 2,319 pages of the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act which confers nearly unlimited power on various agencies to control by fiat the nation's financial, banking and investment sectors. The bill also creates new agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, not subject to any oversight by Congress. This overall process was repeated numerous times with other legislation all with the intent of granting unfettered power to the executive branch controlled by Barack Obama and his radical associates.
Additionally, the Obama administration has, through its unilaterally determined rule making and regulatory powers, created laws out of whole cloth. The Environmental Protection Agency on a near daily basis issues new regulations clearly out of their purview in order to modify and change environmental laws previously passed and to impose a radical green agenda never approved by Congress. The same is true of the Energy and Interior Departments among many others.
None of these extra-constitutional actions have been challenged by Congress. The left in America knows this usurpation of power is nearly impossible to reverse unless stopped in its early stages.
It is clearly the mindset of this administration and its appointees that Congress is merely a nuisance and can be ignored after they were able to take full advantage of the useful idiots in the Democrat controlled House and Senate in 2009-2010 and the Democrat Senate in the current Congress.
Additionally, Barack Obama knows after his re-election a Republican controlled House and Senate will not be able to enact any legislation to roll back the power previously granted to the Executive Branch or usurped by them. His veto will not be overridden as there will always be at least 145 Democratic members of the House or 34 in the Senate in agreement with or intimidated by an administration more than willing to use Chicago style political tactics.
The stalemate between the Executive and Legislative Branches will inure to the benefit of Barack Obama and his fellow leftists.
The most significant power Congress has is the control of the purse-strings as all spending must be approved by them However,once re-elected, Barack Obama, as confirmed by his willingness to do or say anything and his unscrupulous re-election tactics,would not only threaten government shutdowns but would deliberately withhold payments to those dependent on government support as a means of intimidating and forcing a Republican controlled Congress to surrender to his demands, thus neutering their ability to control the administration through spending constraints.
Further, this administration has shown contempt for the courts by ignoring various court orders, e.g. the Gulf of Mexico oil drilling moratorium, as well as stonewalling subpoenas and requests issued by Congress. The Eric Holder Justice Department has become the epitome of corruption as part of the most dishonest and deceitful administration in American history. In a second term the arrogance of Barack Obama and his minions will become more blatant as he will not have to be concerned with re-election.
Who will be there to enforce the rule of law, a Supreme Court ruling or the Constitution? No one. Barack Obama and his fellow-travelers will be unchallenged as they run roughshod over the American people.
Many Republicans and conservatives dissatisfied with the prospect of Mitt Romney as the nominee for president are instead focused on re-taking the House and Senate. That goal, while worthy and necessary, is meaningless unless Barack Obama is defeated . The nation is not dealing with a person of character and integrity but someone of single-minded purpose and overwhelming narcissism. Judging by his actions, words and deeds during his first term, he does not intend to work with Congress,either Republican or Democrat in his second term but rather to force his radical agenda on the American people through the power he has usurped or been granted.
The governmental structure of the United States was set up by the founders in the hope that over the years only those people of high moral character and integrity would assume the reins of power. However, knowing that was not always possible, they dispersed power over three distinct and independent branches as a check on each other.
What they could not imagine is the surrender and abdication of its constitutional duty by the preeminent governmental branch, the Congress, to a chief executive devoid of any character or integrity coupled with a judiciary essentially powerless to enforce the law when the chief executive ignores them.
Conservatives, Libertarians, the Republican Party and Mitt Romney must come to grips with this moment in time and their historical role in denying Barack Obama and his minions their ultimate goal. All resources must be directed at that end-game and not merely controlling Congress and the various committee chairmanships.
Steve McCann
May 12, 2012
There has never been a more important presidential... (show quote)


Instead of reading this stuff above, which was "slightly " biased
and betting you won't check " the facts "

HealthCare.gov

Man up or Woman up and check for yourself . After all, it is your life. It is set up so you can easily go to what's important to you first , and then check the " FACTS " that were brought to you by these totally unbiased gentlemen.
quote=rozarius There has never been a more import... (show quote)


I would not necessarily call HealthCare.gov to be an unbiased source, that information is prepared and filtered through a communications group who are very careful in how information is disseminated to the public... It is interesting my brother's son-in-law was a spokes person for Health and Human services under the Obama administration and a couple of Thanksgivings back during the Haiti earthquake he was reading and what I could only characterize as censuring communications and releases from the CDC regarding the Colora and conditions in Haiti at the time, so even our scientific community communicating with another government is censured and their communications are made to fit a more politically acceptable agenda... I know that my niece's husband is no scientist, but he does have a background in PR and that was what was most important to the administration and that is why he was reading CDC communications before they were released.

It is really hard for me to take anything coming out of this administration at face value, they have changed our State Department fact sheets on foreign countries to reflect the Obama administrations policies, they have done the same with the presidential biographies, they have added paragraphs to presidents starting with Calvin Coolidge comparing their accomplishments with those of modern day Obama...

It is sad to say but our government is not necessarily a good source for information in this day in age.
quote=Lancer W/A Canon quote=rozarius There has ... (show quote)


That is the law for you to read, in all it's glory , and for you to see what's written .

Here, try this Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
quote=Blurryeyed quote=Lancer W/A Canon quote=r... (show quote)
Tell me why Union's Health care plans were given a... (show quote)


They haven't been favored. Your just anti-union. Your parents probably benefitted from a union pension but they didn't will you their benefits and now you are disgruntled.
quote=Screamin Scott Tell me why Union's Health c... (show quote)
Boy are you a crock full of shit...Neither parent... (show quote)


Reading some more of your ranting and it shows me you have the foggiest idea about being union.
quote=Screamin Scott Boy are you a crock full of... (show quote)
I got one for you Lou....If Unions are so great to... (show quote)


Well, you asked the question, now my answer: It's law in certain states you have to be full pledged union members. although you can become a dues objector and pay a partial dues rate based on what it costs the union to only represent you for being union for the union to do it's normal duties of policing the contract, etc.
Some states are commonly referred to as right to work states, meaning you don't have to belong to the union but the union still must represent you. Sort of being a free loader, like what Romney referred people to in his remarks. The union has to negoitate for you, go to arbitration for you, file grievances for you. It's really free loading in a sense. Not fair to the other employees at the shop who belong to the union and pay dues for union representation. It really does cause problems at negoiations because managements know how many people would actually strike when an agreement can't be agreed upon. Those not in the union must report for work and those on strike would be on the picket line.
Another question you brought up is that the union would be able to tell who voted for a union. That's a bull crap lie. In an election called for by the NLRB what that issue is all about is that the unions want a simple majority. Meaning that if we would get a simple majority of signers who want a union at a shop on a organizing drive then the company and those who signed for the union who created the majority would go into binding arbitration to try and reach an agreement between both sides. The way it is now in the non transportation side. If the members in a particular shop ask a union to do an organizing drive and this process gets at least 30% of the employees to sign a petition to form a union. That union must then petition the NLRB to hold a hearing and if an election is set then the union still must win that election by a simple majority. During this time frame up to the election the company can call captive audience meetings (mandatory meetings) and outside company co nsultants can be called in to try and get the employees not to vote for the union. In this process it becomes very difficult for unions to achieve a victory. Because in most part managements intimadate their employees in these meetings and outside of these meetings in the shop.
So it's not a good setting right off the bat for either side.
What the unions today want to have happen is that a more peacefull situation is developed where both sides mutually agree that they can bring about an atmosphere where it's a win win for both sides. I'll tell you today more unions are adapted to bringing about better productivity and building up a company then most people give them credit for. Yes, some employers need to be forced into a really hard nosed type situation but it need not be that way. Employees who have the sense that their employer cares about them and lets them form a union without a fight find out that it is for the better for both sides and better in the long run.
quote=Screamin Scott I got one for you Lou....If ... (show quote)
Lou, I almost went to work for Local 692 back in 1... (show quote)


That must have been a Teamster Local or Longshoremens Local. When you just use the term Local 692 that doesn't ring a bell. I had a local in my union that had a number 692 and a district lodge with a 692 number. Today most of the corruption is gone from the union tables. Unions today have much better regulations to follow. Sure some places still experience problems but by a large part unions run a pretty clean show. yes years past some unions gave all unions a bad name which they all didn't deserve. Some employers are downright respectable employers and employees are satisfied. Huge multi-national companies are very hard to work for and a union is essential for the employees to have a voice on the job and examples the Airlines, Auto-industry, etc. which are huge, employees need help with unions. Unions are beneficial for employees if they want to have a say on the job. It's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned. I was a full-time union rep. for 18 years and before that a shop representative and local lodge officer and did all kinds of union work from negoiating, arbitration and organizing duties and political work. This year I have the phone ringing off the hook sometimes because of the election process. I wouldn't give it up for anything. It's alot of enjoying work most of the time. This year it's most enjoying because we are apparently on a winning side which keeps the duties energized.

Reply
Oct 1, 2012 10:10:12   #
rozarius Loc: Houston, Texas
 
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medicare supplement insurance carrier on Saturday. And as stated by many people who are trying to warn us, like the article I posted from the lady at BCBS, his rates will increase drastically. In 2013, they go from the current $23.00/mo. to $32.00/mo. in 2013, and THEN in 2014 they will jump to $64.00/mo. We knew it was coming and I'm so glad some of the insurance companies are trying to warn us. So you Obama-ites go ahead and put this man back in the White House for another four years so he can go ahead and finish off the good old USA. I'm just grateful that I live in Texas, because you see, we can succeed and become a Republic again. Take your blinders off people, and stop drinking his kool-aid...it's laced with cionide. Go see the movie 2016. If that doesn't wake you up, there's absolutely no hope for you. God help us all, and God Bless the United States of America. This is my last post on the subject of Politics. I just pray that all the great information from this topic has woke up at least a few people.

Reply
 
 
Oct 1, 2012 10:49:26   #
Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.
 
rozarius wrote:
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medicare supplement insurance carrier on Saturday. And as stated by many people who are trying to warn us, like the article I posted from the lady at BCBS, his rates will increase drastically. In 2013, they go from the current $23.00/mo. to $32.00/mo. in 2013, and THEN in 2014 they will jump to $64.00/mo. We knew it was coming and I'm so glad some of the insurance companies are trying to warn us. So you Obama-ites go ahead and put this man back in the White House for another four years so he can go ahead and finish off the good old USA. I'm just grateful that I live in Texas, because you see, we can succeed and become a Republic again. Take your blinders off people, and stop drinking his kool-aid...it's laced with cionide. Go see the movie 2016. If that doesn't wake you up, there's absolutely no hope for you. God help us all, and God Bless the United States of America. This is my last post on the subject of Politics. I just pray that all the great information from this topic has woke up at least a few people.
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medic... (show quote)


Unfortunately Succession for Texas is a myth..... all states at one time supposedly had the right to succeed but the Civil War changed all that.... Texas has no more right to succeed than does the state of Florida or New York.... I wish however that California would succeed, that would solve so many problems..

Reply
Oct 1, 2012 11:19:54   #
UP-2-IT Loc: RED STICK, LA
 
Blurryeyed wrote:
rozarius wrote:
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medicare supplement insurance carrier on Saturday. And as stated by many people who are trying to warn us, like the article I posted from the lady at BCBS, his rates will increase drastically. In 2013, they go from the current $23.00/mo. to $32.00/mo. in 2013, and THEN in 2014 they will jump to $64.00/mo. We knew it was coming and I'm so glad some of the insurance companies are trying to warn us. So you Obama-ites go ahead and put this man back in the White House for another four years so he can go ahead and finish off the good old USA. I'm just grateful that I live in Texas, because you see, we can succeed and become a Republic again. Take your blinders off people, and stop drinking his kool-aid...it's laced with cionide. Go see the movie 2016. If that doesn't wake you up, there's absolutely no hope for you. God help us all, and God Bless the United States of America. This is my last post on the subject of Politics. I just pray that all the great information from this topic has woke up at least a few people.
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medic... (show quote)


Unfortunately Succession for Texas is a myth..... all states at one time supposedly had the right to succeed but the Civil War changed all that.... Texas has no more right to succeed than does the state of Florida or New York.... I wish however that California would succeed, that would solve so many problems..
quote=rozarius Well folks, my husband got a notic... (show quote)


Yes it would, but they need to take Texas with them. In her rant about her husbands suppliment going up she needs to turn to Gov. Perry about that. The state controls insurance rates there.

Reply
Oct 1, 2012 12:22:17   #
Hunter Lou 1947 Loc: Minnesota
 
rozarius wrote:
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medicare supplement insurance carrier on Saturday. And as stated by many people who are trying to warn us, like the article I posted from the lady at BCBS, his rates will increase drastically. In 2013, they go from the current $23.00/mo. to $32.00/mo. in 2013, and THEN in 2014 they will jump to $64.00/mo. We knew it was coming and I'm so glad some of the insurance companies are trying to warn us. So you Obama-ites go ahead and put this man back in the White House for another four years so he can go ahead and finish off the good old USA. I'm just grateful that I live in Texas, because you see, we can succeed and become a Republic again. Take your blinders off people, and stop drinking his kool-aid...it's laced with cionide. Go see the movie 2016. If that doesn't wake you up, there's absolutely no hope for you. God help us all, and God Bless the United States of America. This is my last post on the subject of Politics. I just pray that all the great information from this topic has woke up at least a few people.
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medic... (show quote)


Just like Harvester Romney and Lyin Ryan spreading some more false crap on the airwaves. When you guy's rely on gutter politics it's no wonder people don't trust you.

Reply
Oct 1, 2012 13:11:22   #
UP-2-IT Loc: RED STICK, LA
 
Hunter Lou 1947 wrote:
rozarius wrote:
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medicare supplement insurance carrier on Saturday. And as stated by many people who are trying to warn us, like the article I posted from the lady at BCBS, his rates will increase drastically. In 2013, they go from the current $23.00/mo. to $32.00/mo. in 2013, and THEN in 2014 they will jump to $64.00/mo. We knew it was coming and I'm so glad some of the insurance companies are trying to warn us. So you Obama-ites go ahead and put this man back in the White House for another four years so he can go ahead and finish off the good old USA. I'm just grateful that I live in Texas, because you see, we can succeed and become a Republic again. Take your blinders off people, and stop drinking his kool-aid...it's laced with cionide. Go see the movie 2016. If that doesn't wake you up, there's absolutely no hope for you. God help us all, and God Bless the United States of America. This is my last post on the subject of Politics. I just pray that all the great information from this topic has woke up at least a few people.
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medic... (show quote)


Just like Harvester Romney and Lyin Ryan spreading some more false crap on the airwaves. When you guy's rely on gutter politics it's no wonder people don't trust you.
quote=rozarius Well folks, my husband got a notic... (show quote)


It's a shame Rozarius left early found an interesting article in the Sunday San Antonio newspaper. This was aken from a meeting in Austin last week with regard to a State Income Tax.

How should we determine the marginal rates? Texas has a GSP comparable to Canada's GDP. The bottom provincial tax rate in Ontario is 15.05%. So, for conversation sake, let's make that the top marginal rate in Texas. This would ensure that the top earners in Texas are still paying less than the mid-income citizens of most other states. This revenue would help build and maintain public goods and services --schools (K-12 and higher education), subsidized childcare, infrastructure, cultural institutions, civil servants -- that are commensurate with the state's population growth and potential while still keeping it a relatively affordable tax for the majority of its citizens: the middle-class and working poor. Moreover, this would also allow Texas to keep corporate and business tax rates low in order to ensure that the state remains economically competitive.

Reply
 
 
Oct 1, 2012 13:55:45   #
Screamin Scott Loc: Marshfield Wi, Baltimore Md, now Dallas Ga
 
You do realize that Texas currently has no State Income Tax ?

UP-2-IT wrote:
Hunter Lou 1947 wrote:
rozarius wrote:
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medicare supplement insurance carrier on Saturday. And as stated by many people who are trying to warn us, like the article I posted from the lady at BCBS, his rates will increase drastically. In 2013, they go from the current $23.00/mo. to $32.00/mo. in 2013, and THEN in 2014 they will jump to $64.00/mo. We knew it was coming and I'm so glad some of the insurance companies are trying to warn us. So you Obama-ites go ahead and put this man back in the White House for another four years so he can go ahead and finish off the good old USA. I'm just grateful that I live in Texas, because you see, we can succeed and become a Republic again. Take your blinders off people, and stop drinking his kool-aid...it's laced with cionide. Go see the movie 2016. If that doesn't wake you up, there's absolutely no hope for you. God help us all, and God Bless the United States of America. This is my last post on the subject of Politics. I just pray that all the great information from this topic has woke up at least a few people.
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medic... (show quote)


Just like Harvester Romney and Lyin Ryan spreading some more false crap on the airwaves. When you guy's rely on gutter politics it's no wonder people don't trust you.
quote=rozarius Well folks, my husband got a notic... (show quote)


It's a shame Rozarius left early found an interesting article in the Sunday San Antonio newspaper. This was aken from a meeting in Austin last week with regard to a State Income Tax.

How should we determine the marginal rates? Texas has a GSP comparable to Canada's GDP. The bottom provincial tax rate in Ontario is 15.05%. So, for conversation sake, let's make that the top marginal rate in Texas. This would ensure that the top earners in Texas are still paying less than the mid-income citizens of most other states. This revenue would help build and maintain public goods and services --schools (K-12 and higher education), subsidized childcare, infrastructure, cultural institutions, civil servants -- that are commensurate with the state's population growth and potential while still keeping it a relatively affordable tax for the majority of its citizens: the middle-class and working poor. Moreover, this would also allow Texas to keep corporate and business tax rates low in order to ensure that the state remains economically competitive.
quote=Hunter Lou 1947 quote=rozarius Well folks,... (show quote)

Reply
Oct 1, 2012 15:07:17   #
UP-2-IT Loc: RED STICK, LA
 
Screamin Scott wrote:
You do realize that Texas currently has no State Income Tax ?

UP-2-IT wrote:
Hunter Lou 1947 wrote:
rozarius wrote:
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medicare supplement insurance carrier on Saturday. And as stated by many people who are trying to warn us, like the article I posted from the lady at BCBS, his rates will increase drastically. In 2013, they go from the current $23.00/mo. to $32.00/mo. in 2013, and THEN in 2014 they will jump to $64.00/mo. We knew it was coming and I'm so glad some of the insurance companies are trying to warn us. So you Obama-ites go ahead and put this man back in the White House for another four years so he can go ahead and finish off the good old USA. I'm just grateful that I live in Texas, because you see, we can succeed and become a Republic again. Take your blinders off people, and stop drinking his kool-aid...it's laced with cionide. Go see the movie 2016. If that doesn't wake you up, there's absolutely no hope for you. God help us all, and God Bless the United States of America. This is my last post on the subject of Politics. I just pray that all the great information from this topic has woke up at least a few people.
Well folks, my husband got a notice from his Medic... (show quote)


Just like Harvester Romney and Lyin Ryan spreading some more false crap on the airwaves. When you guy's rely on gutter politics it's no wonder people don't trust you.
quote=rozarius Well folks, my husband got a notic... (show quote)


It's a shame Rozarius left early found an interesting article in the Sunday San Antonio newspaper. This was aken from a meeting in Austin last week with regard to a State Income Tax.

How should we determine the marginal rates? Texas has a GSP comparable to Canada's GDP. The bottom provincial tax rate in Ontario is 15.05%. So, for conversation sake, let's make that the top marginal rate in Texas. This would ensure that the top earners in Texas are still paying less than the mid-income citizens of most other states. This revenue would help build and maintain public goods and services --schools (K-12 and higher education), subsidized childcare, infrastructure, cultural institutions, civil servants -- that are commensurate with the state's population growth and potential while still keeping it a relatively affordable tax for the majority of its citizens: the middle-class and working poor. Moreover, this would also allow Texas to keep corporate and business tax rates low in order to ensure that the state remains economically competitive.
quote=Hunter Lou 1947 quote=rozarius Well folks,... (show quote)
You do realize that Texas currently has no State I... (show quote)


Right Scott, at this time they do not, fortunately for yourself you reside in Georgia. Imagine a state income tax on top of the following Taxes & Fees.

Taxes and Fees
911 Emergency Service Fee
911 Equalization Surcharge
911 Prepaid Wireless Emergency Service Fee
911 Wireless Emergency Service Fee
Automobile Burglary and Theft Prevention Authority (ABTPA) Assessment
Automotive Oil Sales Fee
Bank Franchise
Battery Sales Fee
Boat & Boat Motor
Cement Production
Cigarette
Cigar, Tobacco Products
Cigarette/Tobacco Advertising Fee
Coastal Protection
Coin-Operated Machines Tax
Controlled Substances
Crude Oil
Diesel Fuels
Fireworks
Franchise
Gasoline
Hotel
Inheritance
Insurance Maintenance Tax - Workers' Compensation Research
Insurance Maintenance Taxes - Texas Department of Insurance
Insurance Maintenance Tax - Division of Workers Compensation/Office of Injured Employees Counsel
Insurance Premium Tax - Independently Procured
Insurance Premium Tax - Licensed Insurers
Insurance Premium Tax - Surplus Lines/Purchasing Groups
Insurance Premium Tax - Unauthorized Insurance
International Fuel Tax Agreement (IFTA)
Liquefied Gas

Loan Administration Fee
Local Property
Local Sales & Use
Manufactured Housing
Miscellaneous Gross Receipts
Mixed Beverage Tax
Motor Fuels Transporters
Motor Vehicle - Gross Rental Receipts
Motor Vehicle - Local Sports and Community Venue Sales and Use
Motor Vehicle - Sales and Use
Motor Vehicle - Seller-Financed Sales
Motor Vehicle - Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) Registration Surcharge
Motor Vehicle - Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) Surcharge
Natural Gas
Office of Public Insurance Counsel (OPIC) Assessment
Oil & Gas Well Servicing
Oyster Sales Fee
Pari-Mutuel
Petroleum Products Delivery Fee
Property Tax
Public Utility Gross Receipts Assessment
Retail Charge Account Delinquency Fee
Retaliatory Tax
Sales & Use
School Fund Benefit
Sexually Oriented Business Fee
Sulphur
Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) - Off Road Heavy Duty Diesel Equipment Surcharge
Telecommunications Infrastructure Fund (Repealed)
Volunteer Fire Department Assistance Fund Assessment

And Rozrio has the nerve to complain about a 9.00 increase in insurance premium.

Reply
Oct 1, 2012 18:12:05   #
rozarius Loc: Houston, Texas
 
Check this out!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuCaWYvpVZg

Reply
Oct 1, 2012 18:23:05   #
Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.
 
rozarius wrote:


Very nice! Must be home schooled because we all know that they do not teach this in our schools anymore.

Reply
 
 
Oct 1, 2012 19:29:03   #
UP-2-IT Loc: RED STICK, LA
 
Very compelling, but which of the two would meet their expectations.

Reply
Oct 1, 2012 20:02:06   #
Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.
 
UP-2-IT wrote:
Very compelling, but which of the two would meet their expectations.


LMAO.

Reply
Nov 7, 2012 07:06:28   #
linuxfanatik Loc: Northumberland, England.
 
I'm not an American - I'm just a UK citizen however, I prefer Obama to Romney - It wasn't so long ago that Romney said that he didn't give a damn for people out of a job, yet when he went on the campaign trail - it was "I'll do anything for you pal" - Its a case of money talks again with Romney ^_^! Obama is doing his best - it takes years to get out of the hole that G. W. Bush made for himself. We have the same problem from our Prime Minister (David Cameron) Its gonna take years to recover from His mistakes!

Reply
Nov 7, 2012 07:50:19   #
linuxfanatik Loc: Northumberland, England.
 
America is a Great Place to live - I lived there for six months in Arizona, I got into the American way, watched baseball games in Flagstaff, visited the Indian Castle down South a-ways, visited Crater valley and the Rio Grande Valley - whoa! That is one big hole in the ground! Your constitution is superb - I wish we had a Constitution like that and the Bill of Rights - written in a really poetic way - by great men! You have the world at your feet, Appreciate it and do something about it - Obama can only do so much, give him your strength, your conviction and your time then you can know you are the Greatest Nation in the World!

Reply
Page <<first <prev 7 of 8 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.