Out of the Blue

So with the imminent Halloween being perhaps the most celebrated holiday in our area, we made sure to pick up an ample supply of candy over the weekend. I normally make sure we get at least one sack o' sweets that I will like, which I'll hold off unless we are in short supply; this way I know I will enjoy the leftovers. This year when I was not paying enough attention, however, MrsBlue managed to pick out three different giant candy bags, all of which appeal to me, and what's worse, broke with tradition by opening them all already to fill our giant candy cauldron in advance. You can see where this is heading; after watching a few candy orgies, MrsBlue finally requested I hold off on my snacking until after the kids trick-or-treat, for fear that we run short. Not to mention I was probably turning into the Great Cornholio.

My people have no bungholes!

T.P. for my Links! Thanks Ant and Mike Martinez.
Play: Cat Bowling. Thanks Strich.
Link of the Morning: Nad Shot. Thanks Boing Boing.
Dark Blade Case Modification Part 1.
Stories: Bonfire event banned in Guy Fawkes' home town.
Man, being a cop just gets worse and worse!
Gives new meaning to "going in the car."
Science!: In the Dreamscape of Nightmares, Clues to Why We Dream.
Image: Portal Icon.
Media: Zapp-prank during soccer-match.
Wake up Cat. Thanks zombie69.
Robot Chicken hilariously mixes 300 and the American Revolution.
Teh Funny: UserFriendly.
View : : :
36 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older
36.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 25, 2007, 20:15
36.
Re: Fires Oct 25, 2007, 20:15
Oct 25, 2007, 20:15
 
Of course, it probably will be a money pit and and misspent, but that's a different argument.

Actually - that WAS the comments by WH and myself before you entered.

The Enrichment Center reminds you that the weighted companion cube will never threaten to stab you and, in fact, cannot speak.
35.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 25, 2007, 17:59
mag
35.
Re: Fires Oct 25, 2007, 17:59
Oct 25, 2007, 17:59
mag
 
I don't understand why you keep repeating what I said.
Presumably because you insulted my ability to reason every time I said anything, suggesting that you disagreed with whatever I was saying.
I agree that all of your stats are correct.
You actually shouldn't have, because I just realized I did my math wrong in the last line there. That's the average of all of the states, but the actual dollars received per dollar spent for the country is 1.06. But this still means that California receives 25% less per dollar than the average.

The original argument was, of course, that since Californians pay more than they receive, we shouldn't throw a fit because they're getting some federal relief money. You could probably do the math to figure out exactly how much money the feds could give them before they actually started receiving more than they sent.

Of course, it probably will be a money pit and and misspent, but that's a different argument.

As a % of salary - they are even better off.
They're more in line with the average, at least. The state I just moved from and the one I just moved to are both in the top ten of the 'getting screwed' list for that one.

34.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 25, 2007, 16:21
34.
Re: Fires Oct 25, 2007, 16:21
Oct 25, 2007, 16:21
 
I don't understand why you keep repeating what I said.
We agree on the stats.

I think the original statement, made by the poster (not you moron) is false.

I agree that all of your stats are correct.

As a % of salary - they are even better off.
I am in MN - and accept the fact that I get duck screwed because I live in one of the most liberal states in the Union. I have often thought about moving back across the border from whence I came and living in South Dakota. (Notice they are ranked at the bottom. :)) - but there are no jobs, and you have to deal with a lot of unemployment, and high crime.....sooooo, yeah, guess it is a trade off. I always figured I would retire there though. Beautiful area.

The Enrichment Center reminds you that the weighted companion cube will never threaten to stab you and, in fact, cannot speak.
This comment was edited on Oct 25, 16:27.
33.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 25, 2007, 15:59
mag
33.
Re: Fires Oct 25, 2007, 15:59
Oct 25, 2007, 15:59
mag
 
You're awesome, Batman. I never said 'much more.' True or not, the other guy said that and not me.

But, we can look into that too. Californians pay $2700 per capita. the US as a whole pays $2200. So, Californians pay ~20% more than the average for the whole country.

Per dollar sent to the Government in taxes, California receives 79 cents back. The national average is $1.17.

This means that Californians pay $2700 per capita and receive $2133. The nation, on average, pays $2200 and receives $2574.

They pay more, and receive less.

32.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 25, 2007, 10:49
32.
Re: Fires Oct 25, 2007, 10:49
Oct 25, 2007, 10:49
 
mag - you are incapable of common sense.

Original Statement
California gives much more to the federal government than it normally receives back.

False.

They may give a lot, but they don't give "much more" - and they sure as hell don't give "much more" than a lot of other states.

The Enrichment Center reminds you that the weighted companion cube will never threaten to stab you and, in fact, cannot speak.
31.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 25, 2007, 02:47
mag
31.
Re: Fires Oct 25, 2007, 02:47
Oct 25, 2007, 02:47
mag
 
1. Did YOU read the article? Are you able to put comprehensive thought into an article you read? Did you THEN try and convert that into per capita tax burden? I didn't think so.

Maybe I used the wrong terminology when I said 'tax burden,' but I was referring to the numbers from the link that you posted. It said, effectively, that the state of CA was getting a poor deal because for every dollar spent, they receive less in taxes than most other states in the country. Now, if you want to talk per capita, here is another link.

http://www.census.gov/govs/statetax/05staxrank.html

As % of per capita income, they rank 20th. I think you were thinking of total dollars per capita, though, right? For that, they rank 9th. Whoa, shit, look at that! I was right anyway!

2. So the judge is criticized by not keeping her office open for someone who was found guilty and who had all the prior chances of getting a stay of execution (pun intended) or other reprieve? F that in the A. This society gives people too many chances. You must be a liberal.

If realizing that occasionally innocent people are found guilty means that I am a liberal, well, fuck, I guess I am. I'm referring to the Criner case mentioned in the article, in particular, of course. And if you go do a little research on his case, it seems that the only evidence against him were three testimonies that turned out to be inconsistent under cross-examination. After he was found guilty, a DNA test showed that the semen found in her wasn't his. It seems to me that this would provide at least a little bit of reasonable doubt, right? And she wouldn't even grant a retrial to him.

Edit: I misread or misremembered, apparently. Criner wasn't on death row, he was just sentenced to 99 years in jail. Apologies.
This comment was edited on Oct 25, 02:50.
30.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 25, 2007, 02:27
mag
30.
Re: Fires Oct 25, 2007, 02:27
Oct 25, 2007, 02:27
mag
 
Whoa now Buddy. Just because Bush thought somebody was innoncent does not mean anything, he is a tard.

Bush is a tard, yes. But he also quite likes having criminals put to death, according to his record. That he would pardon someone on death row says a lot about the case. The judge wouldn't even grant the guy another trial.

Edit: I misread or misremembered, apparently. Criner wasn't on death row, he was just sentenced to 99 years in jail. But, still.
This comment was edited on Oct 25, 02:51.
29.
 
No subject
Oct 24, 2007, 22:01
29.
No subject Oct 24, 2007, 22:01
Oct 24, 2007, 22:01
 
Man, being a cop just gets worse and worse!

I believe until JUST RECENTLY (read as 'the past 12 months') most major cities allowed 1 drink during your shift over lunch or other meal. Some cases are coming around now here in MPLS where cops were getting lap dances and other activities in downtown. Unbelievable.

Now in NY, *GASP* what a shock! If an officer is involved in a shooting or other incident that involves someone getting hurt, the officers involved have to take a breath test. Well no shit. I really can't believe the union is all up in arms - probably because they can't have beers for lunch with the Captains anymore. Who knows.

The Enrichment Center reminds you that the weighted companion cube will never threaten to stab you and, in fact, cannot speak.
28.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 24, 2007, 21:58
28.
Re: Fires Oct 24, 2007, 21:58
Oct 24, 2007, 21:58
 
Are you going to block yourself or something? Did you even read the site you linked to? Per dollar, that 79 cents makes it one of the ten highest tax burdens.

And right after praising the judge that was going to put someone to death that even George Fucking Bush thought was innocent. Christ.

For your lack of free thought, I compliment you on being able to structure a complete sentence without going into a seizure part way through.

1. Did YOU read the article? Are you able to put comprehensive thought into an article you read? Did you THEN try and convert that into per capita tax burden? I didn't think so.

2. So the judge is criticized by not keeping her office open for someone who was found guilty and who had all the prior chances of getting a stay of execution (pun intended) or other reprieve? F that in the A. This society gives people too many chances. You must be a liberal.

The Enrichment Center reminds you that the weighted companion cube will never threaten to stab you and, in fact, cannot speak.
27.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 24, 2007, 21:14
Enahs
 
27.
Re: Fires Oct 24, 2007, 21:14
Oct 24, 2007, 21:14
 Enahs
 
If the first post had been along the lines "I hope this federal aid only goes to those who really need the money for legitimate means, and not support the wealthy who built in dangerous areas without buying insurance", this would have been a much shorter thread.

Of course it would. But where is the fun in that?



Alternating Logo (GreaseMonkey script):
http://www.ualr.edu/szsullivan/scripts_/BluesNewslogo.user.js
I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally.
- W. C. Fields
Avatar 15513
26.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 24, 2007, 20:42
26.
Re: Fires Oct 24, 2007, 20:42
Oct 24, 2007, 20:42
 
Well, no. Everybody that pays taxes actually are supporting this kind of activity.

My point is you might as well be saying "I'm outraged that people murder other people".

I have 100% no problem is my tax money going to help people who really need it, and will use it to better themselves and become self sufficient. I have a problem with my tax money going to programs that remove personal responsibility from people and just encourage them to continue to be lazy and stupid.

Great. Just like not killing people, I'm guessing the vast majority of Americans feel the same way. That's a much different statement than the extremes "Remove all personal responsibility from its residence or make them responsible."

If the first post had been along the lines "I hope this federal aid only goes to those who really need the money for legitimate means, and not support the wealthy who built in dangerous areas without buying insurance", this would have been a much shorter thread.
This comment was edited on Oct 24, 20:46.
25.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 24, 2007, 20:21
25.
Re: Fires Oct 24, 2007, 20:21
Oct 24, 2007, 20:21
 
I worked at a grocery store for quite a while. Everyday at least 5 people would come in with their WIC vouchers (I am not making these numbers up). And as the supervisor I had to ring them up, regular cashiers were not allowed. They would use their WIC vouchers for their bread and milk and cereal and cheese and juice and baby food and diapers and a few other things. Cool, fine, help out somebody that needs it. They would then buy $100 worth of groceries with Food Stamps. I am fine with that, helping out people who really need it as you say. Except, they then go get in a car that is costing them $600+ a month in payments, plus crazy insurance.

Not just that, I have personally seen similar situations except they pay for staples with food stamps/WIC and then buy, literally, at least $100-200 in alcohol and cigarettes with crisp new $20 and $50 bills. Yeah! My tax $$$ at work!!!

Oh, but you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you.

Have I lied to you? I mean, in this room? Trust me, leave that thing alone. - GLaDOS

Did IQs just drop sharply while I was away? - Ripley
24.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 24, 2007, 20:03
Enahs
 
24.
Re: Fires Oct 24, 2007, 20:03
Oct 24, 2007, 20:03
 Enahs
 
This is a strawman. You'll find very, very few people in this country that would support this type of activity.

Well, no. Everybody that pays taxes actually are supporting this kind of activity.

And even if these are only $500,000 homes in California. There are people, that could easily afford insurance but chose not too, and will get financial support for rebuilding their homes and lives. Those people are f'in assholes that do not deserve help.


So what do you do when people are not helping themselves, and not enough people willingly give to support those people? This isn't a hypothetical, either. Before Social Security, people were dying because they had not adequately prepared for retirement. If you don't think the government should step in to help these people, and experience show us that other people aren't willing to do so on their own, what is your solution? The only options I see in the current system are let them suffer and die, or force the community to assist them, which means national service and/or taxes.

There is a difference in helping people with the basic necessities and paying for stupidity.

Let me give you an example. There is a national government program called WIC (Women, Infants and Children).
http://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/
Maybe you have heard of it.
I worked at a grocery store for quite a while. Everyday at least 5 people would come in with their WIC vouchers (I am not making these numbers up). And as the supervisor I had to ring them up, regular cashiers were not allowed. They would use their WIC vouchers for their bread and milk and cereal and cheese and juice and baby food and diapers and a few other things. Cool, fine, help out somebody that needs it. They would then buy $100 worth of groceries with Food Stamps. I am fine with that, helping out people who really need it as you say. Except, they then go get in a car that is costing them $600+ a month in payments, plus crazy insurance.

The government has removed all personal responsibility to provide the food for themselves and children. Do they use that benefit to save money and become a responsible adult? Buy their children better study material? Save it for a college education for their children? No. They get a $600 a month car payment because it is a cooler looking car then the $300 a month car that would get them to work, get their children to school, etc.

My (and your) tax money is paying to remove their personal responsibility, and it is not helping them out, it is just reinforcing them to think it is ok to expect the government to provide for you.


If you are seriously mentally or physically handicapped, yes, I think as a society, because we are a society, should help those out.

But I do not want my tax money wasted on anybody that is not willing to help better themselves. I am of the personal opinion that suffering will do them good.


I have a nice life now, but my family is by no means rich. We were in fact quite poor. But my mother sacrificed to give me a better life, and I did not squander her hardships. She did it all on her on, zero government assistant.


It sucks that some people abuse it, and it seems like most do. And that is why people get so compasionate about it.

I also do not see why it should be the governments responsibility to force you into thinking about your retirement. You should know that there will inevitably come a time you are not physically or mentally able to work. Do something about it. It sucks people will suffer.

It basically comes down to this, in my opinion.
It is not the governments job to protect you from yourself and your own stupidity. They are to protect you from others own stupidity, within reason, but not your own.


I have 100% no problem is my tax money going to help people who really need it, and will use it to better themselves and become self sufficient. I have a problem with my tax money going to programs that remove personal responsibility from people and just encourage them to continue to be lazy and stupid.



I tried to make it clear that this is my opinion.

*edit*
I would also like to say one other thing, about your comment about social security. The times when it was invented were quite different. Education was not as mandated and accessible. Clean safe water was not as available. The medical science(s) were not as advanced.

Time were completely different, just because the government did something then does not mean it is appropriate now. I mean then hell, it was not always illegal to own slaves. It worked then, why not now?





Alternating Logo (GreaseMonkey script):
http://www.ualr.edu/szsullivan/scripts_/BluesNewslogo.user.js


This comment was edited on Oct 24, 20:17.
I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally.
- W. C. Fields
Avatar 15513
23.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 24, 2007, 19:34
23.
Re: Fires Oct 24, 2007, 19:34
Oct 24, 2007, 19:34
 
I'm watching Windows install, so unfortunately for you I've got nothing better to do right now than post.

There is a difference in willingly giving a chosen amount of your money to help somebody you think deserves help and removing personal responsibility and having the government use your tax money to help those that do not help themselves.

So what do you do when people are not helping themselves, and not enough people willingly give to support those people? This isn't a hypothetical, either. Before Social Security, people were dying because they had not adequately prepared for retirement. If you don't think the government should step in to help these people, and experience show us that other people aren't willing to do so on their own, what is your solution? The only options I see in the current system are let them suffer and die, or force the community to assist them, which means national service and/or taxes.

Not pay to rebuild some assholes $10,000,000 house on the cost of Florida for the 3rd time

This is a strawman. You'll find very, very few people in this country that would support this type of activity.

22.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 24, 2007, 19:08
Enahs
 
22.
Re: Fires Oct 24, 2007, 19:08
Oct 24, 2007, 19:08
 Enahs
 
And right after praising the judge that was going to put someone to death that even George Fucking Bush thought was innocent. Christ.

Whoa now Buddy. Just because Bush thought somebody was innoncent does not mean anything, he is a tard.


Then why do you give any money to charity? Seriously. If you think everyone should be responsible for themselves, what is your reason for giving to charity? Is your point that everyone should be as responsible as you? Well, they aren't - that's reality. So what do you do about it? Let them suffer and die?

Good lord. Is it that complicated?

There is a difference in willingly giving a chosen amount of your money to help somebody you think deserves help and removing personal responsibility and having the government use your tax money to help those that do not help themselves. You know, the tax money that is supposed to provide the government with the ability to protect you and your few inalienable rights, and maintain the infrastructure of society. Not pay to rebuild some assholes $10,000,000 house on the cost of Florida for the 3rd time, because the asshole keeps rebuilding it there and not insuring it and it keeps getting destroyed by hurricanes. I chose to use an example from something other the California (since some people seem to think some people are attacking California) , that happens all the F'in time. But mostly I wanted to point out how stupid Florida is and people that live in it (I am looking at you Elfy).




And really people, comparing the cost of stuff to the war? Granted the war is a giant waste what little taxes I pay and could have been spent on more useful things, but still, that is just a silly argument.
That is like comparing the cost of the food you eat daily to the cost of a hospital visit for a broken arm. That makes sense, how?


IMHO!

It just isn't a happy day here at Blues until the insults start flying ...


And you are all tards. And I f'in hate you Batman for using my word Tard. I hate all of you for reading my word tard!



*I might come off as aggressive or mean or passionate. I am not. I am just being direct and injecting my own sense of humor I find funny while writing. If you are offended by this post, well, I already told you I hate you, so why do I care if you are offended?





Alternating Logo (GreaseMonkey script):
http://www.ualr.edu/szsullivan/scripts_/BluesNewslogo.user.js


This comment was edited on Oct 24, 19:16.
I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally.
- W. C. Fields
Avatar 15513
21.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 24, 2007, 18:54
21.
Re: Fires Oct 24, 2007, 18:54
Oct 24, 2007, 18:54
 
No - they get 79 cents on every dollar.

So, are my numbers are wrong, or are you refusing to accept reality? It is actually possible for both statistics to be correct. Neither one discounts my point that California usually gives more to the federal government than it receives -- by a lot. If you want to break it down per-capita, fine. Then the amount received back in disaster aid should be calculated per-capita as well. If the government provides, say, $10 million in aid, that's $0.27 per Californian. To put that into perspective, I personally paid well over $20,000 last year in federal taxes.

All I ask is that others do the same. Be responsible for yourself.

Then why do you give any money to charity? Seriously. If you think everyone should be responsible for themselves, what is your reason for giving to charity? Is your point that everyone should be as responsible as you? Well, they aren't - that's reality. So what do you do about it? Let them suffer and die?

20.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 24, 2007, 18:21
nin
20.
Re: Fires Oct 24, 2007, 18:21
Oct 24, 2007, 18:21
nin
 
It just isn't a happy day here at Blues until the insults start flying ...

Yep!



------------------------------------------------
"I feel compelled to comment on Zephalfdkasj's completely irrelevant and lengthy tangent into concealed pistol carry...Rarely is extreme insecurity so painfully, transparently obvious."
19.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 24, 2007, 18:14
19.
Re: Fires Oct 24, 2007, 18:14
Oct 24, 2007, 18:14
 

Fucking dumbass.

It just isn't a happy day here at Blues until the insults start flying ...


-----------------------------------
Don't be a stoop, spread your goop
There's no place like 127.0.0.1
18.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 24, 2007, 18:01
18.
Re: Fires Oct 24, 2007, 18:01
Oct 24, 2007, 18:01
 
Get your priorities straight.

I wasn't talking about war costs, different topic entirely. I guess you'll be quoting abortion statistics next, huh? Or maybe the cost of gas in Kansas?


Oh, but you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just because some watery tart threw a sword at you.

Have I lied to you? I mean, in this room? Trust me, leave that thing alone. - GLaDOS

Did IQs just drop sharply while I was away? - Ripley
17.
 
Re: Fires
Oct 24, 2007, 17:51
17.
Re: Fires Oct 24, 2007, 17:51
Oct 24, 2007, 17:51
 
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071024/pl_nm/iraq_usa_funding_dc

U.S. CBO estimates $2.4 trillion long-term war costs.

How about that bullshit? And you know it'll be like, 3 trillion if the Republicans have their way. Loot the country for 3 trillion bucks? No problem, right? Help out some people who really need help locally? No chance.
Get your priorities straight.


"It was the Law of the Sea, they said. Civilization ends at the waterline. Beyond that, we all enter the food chain, and not always right at the top."
- Hunter S. Thompson
"While playing golf today I hit two good balls. I stepped on a rake." - Henny Youngman
36 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older