Monday, February 13, 2012

Fair Thee Not

If you listened strictly to mainstream blogs and the media, you'd think that it was only the Republicans who were being intransigent these days. And to a certain extent, they'd be right (the Republicans' boneheadedness regarding taxes, for instance). But, I'm telling you here, I saw something on C-Span the other night in which the Democrats looked like the unreasonable team.........................................................................................The Republicans, folks, are putting forth a proposal in which people who get a subsidy for health insurance (at a rate determined by the Affordable Care Act), if in fact their income goes up precipitously during the year, have to pay a small percentage of that subsidy back. For example, if a family starts off at $50,000 a year and gets a $8,000 subsidy, but one of the family members goes back to work and/or gets a huge raise up to, say, $80,000 a year (in which the subsidy goes down to $1,000 - approximately), under the Republicans' proposal, that family would have to pay $700 back to the government (a paltry 10%)..........................................................................................I mean, I don't know, maybe I'm missing something here. But how, pray tell, is it fair for a family that makes $80,000 a year for 11 months to get a significantly better subsidy than a family that makes $80,000 a year for 12 months? The Democrats are always talking about fairness, no? How in the hell is that frigging fair?

16 comments:

Ema Nymton said...

.

"How in the hell is that frigging fair?"

Are you really worried about something that will NEVER happen being "fair"? (Let me guess, 'you play the lottery', right?)

In which fantasy world do you think anything even close to your scenario might occur? Really, get a clue. Going from unemployed to $80,000 a year in USA? Where at McWalmart, nyuk nyuk nyuk; ya right.

You ain't ever going to become a godzillionary (me niether). Stop the "no taxing the rich because it ain't 'fair'" bunkum. Protecting the wealthy's (oops 'job creators')millions is not about fairness.

Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Ema, think. Sometimes people get raises. Sometimes a spouse goes back to work. It happens all the time. And if it didn't happen all the time, then why are the Dems making a big fat hairy obstructionist deal about it? Come on, man!

w-dervish said...

Will: ...why are the Dems making a big fat hairy obstructionist deal about it?

Are they?

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Yep. They think that people who get a big salary increase in February of a year shouldn't be forced to pay back any of the subsidy that was given them based upon their previous salary level. It's absolutely ludicrous, wd.

w-dervish said...

Will: It's absolutely ludicrous...

Is it?

w-dervish said...

Is it???

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

The Republicans are being stubborn on the tax issue. The Democrats are being stubborn on this one.

w-dervish said...

I don't know that that's true. You didn't link to a story so I really don't know what the hell you're talking about. I just have your interpretation of something you saw on the news (or the Nooz).

I'm not sure what I should be using for search terms on Google to get the real story either. I don't want to waste a lot of time researching this... I've got other things to do.

Unless you can do a better job convincing me I'm going go with the Democrats on this one. They must have their reasons. And you're probably getting your info from some inaccurate Conservatively spun story. This is usually the case when you keep your sources secret.

You probably know that as soon as you reveal your source I'll respond by writing "BULLSHIT" (in all caps), call your source garbage and win the argument.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I told you. I saw it on CSpan. I actually watched the hearings and the testimony and I resent your accusations that I hide anything.............And I almost always go with verified sources. Mr. Carney's book was meticulously sourced and he relied on sources like opensecrets.org - this, as opposed to the abject spin from the likes of people like David Corn. I'm trying to be fair and balanced here and the only thing that you can do in response is stick your head up the asses of shameless fools like Corn (the Democrats were tricked - what, are they fucking children?). Grow fucking up, will ya'.

w-dervish said...

So what you're saying is that you applied your own conservative spin to the story? OK, got it.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Fuck you, you little twerp. I actually watch CSpan and get the lowdown straight and I don't fucking spin for anybody....You don't actually work, do you? I mean, I certainly wouldn't hire you.

w-dervish said...

If you were an employer you'd discriminate based on political views?

That doesn't sound legal to me Will.

I've never had an interview where they asked me what my political views were. I don't use my actual name on blogger either, so an employer couldn't Google my name and make a connection.

Also, you're the one who said you're "fair and balanced", which is the motto of Fox Nooz. Many people realize they're not. I assumed that's why you used the phrase. You were sending a coded message.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I wouldn't discriminate against ANYBODY because of their political views (nice try). I wouldn't hire you because you're an obnoxious, impudent fool. Not a damn thing illegal about that.

#37927 said...

Fuck you, you little twerp.

widdle willy's panties got twisted again I see.

Rusty Shackelford said...

"widdle willy?" Is that the best you have fruitbowl? Why dont you post another 3000 words on something as interesting as the Saudi Arabian oil pipeline....yawn.

w-dervish said...

I've never discussed politics in the workplace. This impression you have of me as an "obnoxious, impudent fool" is based on what I've written here about politics. You wouldn't know who the hell I was if you met me on the street... or interviewed me for a job.

This charge that a person is "unemployable" is one you make, apparently, in regards to anyone who rubs you the wrong way. You've done it before. On 4/8/2010 you said, "Does he work at all? Or is this fellow also unemployable?"

You weren't talking about me, but some anonymous poster that "Rustridesagain" surmised was "Bart/Worf/Anny/Dark Knight, whatever".

These fact-free accusations are (in my experience) those made by Conservatives. You sound EXACTLY like Rusty when you insult people by calling them unemployable, greedy and jealous.