Page 5 three posts from the bottom:



Just as I suspected you just run your mouth and don't even read what you write.

We all, including corporation's, pay in estimated taxes during the year. Most of us do it through payroll deduction. A legal deduction reduces the amount you are required to pay. Since most of us overpay during the year the resulting refund is simply a payback of the overpayment. Corporations are no different. If you get a tax refund after your final filing do you view it as welfare? Is the personal deduction allowed to you as an individual welfare? If a corporation can deduct the amount it paid towards employee health care, is that a corporate welfare payment? According to congress when the deduction was passed it is an incentive for corporations to provide health insurance to its employees. Corporations are responsible to their share holders. Share holders that own pension funds that purchase their stock. People like you. Corporations can and have been sued for failure to use their money wisely.

The programs you point to such as unemployment, welfare, food stamps, etc.. have gotten to the point where too many people find it better to not work than work. The Republican view has been to reduce benefits to the point that people will find it advantageous to seek employment rather than live off of the taxpayer. There is a myth that there are no jobs. There are jobs but not enough people willing to do them when they can make the same money on welfare and unemployment. There are people who will say the Democrats are hurting these people by keeping them dependent on the government. The parents of the children are hurting them with their lack of ambition, not a political party.

Assumptions with proof are insulting. I wrote nothing to lead anyone to assume what you did.

If I was to assume things as you do I would take the position Larry Payne would; based on your writings you must be a paid shill for the DNC. You seem to be able to spend all day, everyday, on here pushing the liberal agenda. Your only goal seems to be insulting people.

As usual you have to get insulting without any reason to do so.

I am not wealthy and I have paid more than my fair share over the years. While entitled to do so, I haven't taken a tax refund since 1998. My country has been good to me and I do not mind paying into the pot.

However, you again misrepresent the real world. Republicans have never pushed for cuts that would damage children. They have consistently pushed for enforcement and fairness in existing programs including immigration. While the Democrats cry out for the common man their agenda is always about increased taxation. There is no such thing as "Corporate Welfare", what is being referred to are legal tax deductions. All passed into law by the Congress.

The American worker has sold his own soul by constantly electing these clowns who never follow through on their promises. Yes, I am including Obama for a second term in that group.

From 2007 to 2010 the Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate. Under Obama the rich have gotten richer and the poor poorer. What exactly have the Democrats done to help anyone but themselves?

http://www.inquisitr.com/954667/president-obama-admits-the-rich-are-getting-richer-under-his-watch/

http://www.juancole.com/2014/01/gilded-getting-richer.html

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/01/21/reminder-the-gap-between-rich-and-poor-has-expanded-under-obama-n1782256

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/11/income-ine******y-obama-bush_n_1419008.html

Just for fair and balanced treatment:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/21/as-obama-hammers-income-ine******y-gap-grows-under-his-presidency/

"Corporate Welfare" is a term the Democrats use to refer to legal tax deductions given to business. A corporation does not have to take advantage of those tax deductions and I haven't heard of any corporations run by Democrats giving up their tax deductions. However, I basically agree with you.

We could give everyone in this country free health care for the money that was spent on creating the ACA web site. We could stop giving money to other countries to be our friends. The President just committed 3 billion to push his c*****e c****e issues in poor nations. The President just committed $33 billion to Africa to influence our economic position with them. Over the last several years we have given Russia over 2.7 billion in aid. In 2012 they rejected it because they thought we were trying to influence their e******ns. The government immediately found someone else to give it to.

We could do better taking care of our own if we had a government intent on making our lives better instead of trying to run the rest of the world.

The Republicans do not want to increase "welfare" because of the lack of enforcement of the rules and the c***ting. If everyone got free healthcare there would be no issue with c***ting except for the i******s which are already an issue.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/15/us/politics/obama-c*****e-c****e-fund-3-billion-announcement.html?_r=0

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/obama-pledges-33-billion-africa-commitments/

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/19/13956839-russia-tells-us-we-dont-want-your-aid-money?lite

I rarely participate in these discussion anymore because of people like you. You have an agenda to push and do not want to consider anything else.

The pure HMO concept went bankrupt. The closest thing to it today is the PPO. There are still plans calling themselves HMO but they are not what the original concept provided.

According to http://www.bcbsm.com/index/health-insurance-help/faqs/topics/how-health-insurance-works/difference-between-hmo-ppo.html The difference between the current crop of so-called HMOs and a PPO is slight:



I do not work for anyone and I have no agenda to push. My point was simple: the ACA cannot provide "free" or even cheaper health care. If you pay attention to the news you already know that two of the architects of the ACA, Jonathon Gruber and Ezekiel Emmanuel, have both said the ACA was sold based on lies and the stupidity of the public. If you just want to nitpick, then I'll declare you the winner; HMOs still exist. Whether or not you can still join an HMO changes nothing. The ACA cannot possibly fulfill the promises made. Nothing is free; as long as healthcare workers expect to be paid for their efforts, someone has to pay.

The OP for this thread is the same concept. If you carefully read the post you find nothing but insinuations and half t***hs.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/13/politics/tapper-gruber/

What exists today as an HMO is not the same as what was originally created. Some have modified their business model and managed to survive. They have morphed into what is now referred to as a PPO or Preferred Provider Organization. Much of the ACA is modeled after the concept.

I speak as an insurance broker from 1978 to 1998 who sold millions in health insurance policies.

The ACA has not changed the cost of treatment. There is no way you can give free treatment, preventive or otherwise. There is no way the ACA can provide what was promised and lower costs of treatment. If you believe otherwise then you are living in a dream world.

I know several people on the ACA. They are unaware of what you say. We had a system of preventative medicine back in the 70's. They were called HMO. 100% of them were bankrupt by the mid 80's. The system was started in California.

There is nothing wrong with what you ask. However, there were bills in formation to address those problems. It wasn't necessary to completely take over the entire industry in order to fix a few issues. After causing approximately six million to lose their health insurance the ACA signed up eight million. Where is the gain? How can someone who legitimately could not afford health insurance now claim that a cheap policy with a $5,000 deductible is an improvement to their situation?

How exactly did the Affordable Care Act change anything in health care? This act did absolutely nothing to improve health care in this country.

As far as the OP is concerned; I have not seen such a distortion of the t***h since the last time I saw Harry Reed talk about how great a job he is doing.

You would have to use Mt. McKinley to do that.

If you did this yourself, it is a very nice job. I like your photo style. This appears to be a Word Press site so I'll ask where did you get the theme you used? The clean straight forward approach is attractive to me.

Amazing shot.

You do not specify if you are watching video residing on your computer or from the internet. 4GB of Ram is enough for Windows 8 to run but it would be better with more. If your problem is watching internet video then the problem is with your internet provider.

You are one of the most despicable people I have ever encountered. You accuse me of wallowing in the name calling cutter that you inhabit and when I call you to prove it you claim that is too much trouble. You are a hypocrite and fraud. You defame our veterans every time the subject comes up. You are the only person I have ever referred to in a less than civil manner and I do not regret it.

Good tips however, there is never a good race car around when you've forgotten your cork screw.