What do Progressives Believe?


Off-Topic Discussions

401 to 450 of 546 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

There are at least as many posts in this thread purporting to explain what "what progressives believe" by non-progressives than there are by progressives. Make of that what you will.


Charlie Bell wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Xpltvdeleted wrote:
Poor people are...stupid...
Naturally...otherwise they wouldn't be poor, would they?
And there's the root of statism. That the unwashed masses are just too dumb to run their own lives, and clearly they must be governed by their betters for their own good.

Or they are just victims of evil rich people, and it's not their fault at all. ;)


Charlie Bell wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Xpltvdeleted wrote:
Poor people are...stupid...
Naturally...otherwise they wouldn't be poor, would they?
And there's the root of statism. That the unwashed masses are just too dumb to run their own lives, and clearly they must be governed by their betters for their own good.

Like it or not, the above line of thought is very closely associated with Progressives AND Liberals by many in this coutry.


lastknightleft wrote:
brad bender wrote:
lastknightleft wrote:
Xpltvdeleted wrote:
Poor people are too stupid to comprehend programs that would allow them to take advantage of rebates, so we need to make it easier on them? Wow... Not to mention that when the section of the poor population that is smart enough to do so files their taxes properly, they generally get MORE money back than they paid in, so any increase in tax (even if it is offset to a certain degree--i'm assuming a break even point) will cause them to lose money.
oh okay, so I must be one of those stupid poor, because despite the fact that I've had to live off of ramen noodles and even then went days without eating (other than family who were nice enough to give me money to buy groceries)because I had rent to pay, I never once got more back for my taxes than I put in. And hey, I filed online using all those government tools to make it possible to get the best rebate possible. Hmm, I guess the government was just out to get me.

FIFTY PERCENT of this country pays nothing in Federal Income tax, half. 46% of those 50% get money than $250 back. So, just to summarize.

You didn't pay anything in federal income taxes.
You got a refund for more than you paid in, meaning you had a net gain in taxes.

Conclusion: You recieved welfare.

Wow did you just tell me that I paid no federal income tax, or that I got back more than I paid in? because I have pay stubs and tax forms that prove you are wrong. So tell me again what I did or didn't do?

I think Brad meant to reply to X rather than you.


Moro wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Xpltvdeleted wrote:
Poor people are...stupid...
Naturally...otherwise they wouldn't be poor, would they?
And there's the root of statism. That the unwashed masses are just too dumb to run their own lives, and clearly they must be governed by their betters for their own good.
Like it or not, the above line of thought is very closely associated with Progressives AND Liberals by many in this coutry.

+1, but I wouldn't limit it to that. I would include the vice side that tends to be associated with the right too.

Liberty's Edge

bugleyman wrote:
There are at least as many posts in this thread purporting to explain what "what progressives believe" by non-progressives than there are by progressives. Make of that what you will.

Kinda like the "What Conservatives Believe" thread? But in reverse? Make of that what you will.

Liberty's Edge

Bitter Thorn wrote:
lastknightleft wrote:
brad bender wrote:
lastknightleft wrote:
Xpltvdeleted wrote:
Poor people are too stupid to comprehend programs that would allow them to take advantage of rebates, so we need to make it easier on them? Wow... Not to mention that when the section of the poor population that is smart enough to do so files their taxes properly, they generally get MORE money back than they paid in, so any increase in tax (even if it is offset to a certain degree--i'm assuming a break even point) will cause them to lose money.
oh okay, so I must be one of those stupid poor, because despite the fact that I've had to live off of ramen noodles and even then went days without eating (other than family who were nice enough to give me money to buy groceries)because I had rent to pay, I never once got more back for my taxes than I put in. And hey, I filed online using all those government tools to make it possible to get the best rebate possible. Hmm, I guess the government was just out to get me.

FIFTY PERCENT of this country pays nothing in Federal Income tax, half. 46% of those 50% get money than $250 back. So, just to summarize.

You didn't pay anything in federal income taxes.
You got a refund for more than you paid in, meaning you had a net gain in taxes.

Conclusion: You recieved welfare.

Wow did you just tell me that I paid no federal income tax, or that I got back more than I paid in? because I have pay stubs and tax forms that prove you are wrong. So tell me again what I did or didn't do?
I think Brad meant to reply to X rather than you.

Well in that case, I'm pissed. I've received help before, I'm not going to lie...my wife was on WIC while she was pregnant and I even got food stamps when I was first starting my family (let the record show I was working full-time the entire time), but to say I receive welfare just because I get a tax refund is a dick move.

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Charlie Bell wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Xpltvdeleted wrote:
Poor people are...stupid...
Naturally...otherwise they wouldn't be poor, would they?
And there's the root of statism. That the unwashed masses are just too dumb to run their own lives, and clearly they must be governed by their betters for their own good.

I don't know how, but for some reason my brain thought "statism" was actually "satanism" and I thought, "huh, I don't quite get how that leads to satanism, but I'm glad to see godwin technology is improving."

So, I've concluded that calling your opponent a nazi just doesn't have the same bite anymore. From now on, if you disagree with me, that makes you a satanist.

Just an FYI.

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Secretlyreplacedwith wrote:
Sebastian wrote:

Can we use a less pejorative term than "stupid poor"? I prefer "unwashed masses," but I can also live with "primitive screwheads."

I hear they make excellent skeet. Can we shoot them with our boom stick?

I suppose, but only so long as it doesn't degrade the quality of the soylent green we would make from them after the fact...

Sovereign Court

Sebastian wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Xpltvdeleted wrote:
Poor people are...stupid...
Naturally...otherwise they wouldn't be poor, would they?
And there's the root of statism. That the unwashed masses are just too dumb to run their own lives, and clearly they must be governed by their betters for their own good.

I don't know how, but for some reason my brain thought "statism" was actually "satanism" and I thought, "huh, I don't quite get how that leads to satanism, but I'm glad to see godwin technology is improving."

So, I've concluded that calling your opponent a nazi just doesn't have the same bite anymore. From now on, if you disagree with me, that makes you a satanist.

Just an FYI.

The problem then comes that what if he actually is a satanist, then you're just complimenting him.


houstonderek wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
There are at least as many posts in this thread purporting to explain what "what progressives believe" by non-progressives than there are by progressives. Make of that what you will.
Kinda like the "What Conservatives Believe" thread? But in reverse? Make of that what you will.

How did I know that post was coming? I could have typed it for you verbatim. Lol.

But yeah...exactly like that. What's your point? Two wrongs? An eye for an eye?

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

lastknightleft wrote:
Sebastian wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Xpltvdeleted wrote:
Poor people are...stupid...
Naturally...otherwise they wouldn't be poor, would they?
And there's the root of statism. That the unwashed masses are just too dumb to run their own lives, and clearly they must be governed by their betters for their own good.

I don't know how, but for some reason my brain thought "statism" was actually "satanism" and I thought, "huh, I don't quite get how that leads to satanism, but I'm glad to see godwin technology is improving."

So, I've concluded that calling your opponent a nazi just doesn't have the same bite anymore. From now on, if you disagree with me, that makes you a satanist.

Just an FYI.

The problem then comes that what if he actually is a satanist, then you're just complimenting him.

Aw crap. And we are on a D&D board after all. Half of you are satanists, right?

Also, when am I finally going to get to learn to cast spells for real?

Scarab Sages

Sebastian wrote:
Creepy Puppet wrote:
bugleyman wrote:

I'll come and say it...I can afford to pay more. In fact, I'd be happy to pay more, at least for several years, if:

1. Spending is sharply curtailed
2. The extra reveneue is used to pay down the national debt

Unfortunately, I just don't see either of those things happening. Instead, the realistic choice seems to be:

Vote Democractic -> Crappy fiscal policy,now with 100% more language police, food police, how-to-raise-your-kids police, penguin....

Vote Republican -> Crappy fiscal policy, now with 100% more morality police!

Both suck, but the first one sucks (a little) less.

Fixed that for you.
Creepy Puppet wrote:
bugleyman wrote:

I'll come and say it...I can afford to pay more. In fact, I'd be happy to pay more, at least for several years, if:

1. Spending is sharply curtailed
2. The extra reveneue is used to pay down the national debt

Unfortunately, I just don't see either of those things happening. Instead, the realistic choice seems to be:

Vote Democractic -> Crappy fiscal policy,now with 100% more language police, food police, how-to-raise-your-kids police, penguin....

Vote Republican -> Crappy fiscal policy, now with 100% more morality police!

Both suck, but the first one sucks (a little) less.

Fixed that for you.
Oh sure, trot out the old penguin-policy debate again. You'll be wishing you voted democrat when the little f!%~ers launch their attack and the country is defenseless...

Does it help your case if you copy someone else's quote twice?

Sebastian wrote:
Oh sure, trot out the old penguin-policy debate again. You'll be wishing you voted democrat when the little f~%&ers launch their attack and the country is defenseless...
Sebastian wrote:
Oh sure, trot out the old penguin-policy debate again. You'll be wishing you voted democrat when the little f~%&ers launch their attack and the country is defenseless...

Come on. Everyone knows that Democrats are behind global warming. Penguins are just the proof.

Sovereign Court

bugleyman wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
There are at least as many posts in this thread purporting to explain what "what progressives believe" by non-progressives than there are by progressives. Make of that what you will.
Kinda like the "What Conservatives Believe" thread? But in reverse? Make of that what you will.

How did I know that post was coming? I could have typed it for you verbatim. Lol.

But yeah...exactly like that. What's your point? Two wrongs? An eye for an eye?

VENGEANCE!

Sovereign Court

Sebastian wrote:


Also, when am I finally going to get to learn to cast spells for real?

You have to hit 8th level and kill blackleaf first.


lastknightleft wrote:
source for that claim on #1?

Source for the claim that the sky is sometimes blue? New York residency back when I was a smoker would be personal anecdote and hence without value, so if you want links, try some of these:

  • Cigarette Taxes, Black Markets, and Crime: Lessons from New York’s 50-Year Losing Battle
  • Big Tobacco's New York Black Market
  • The Unsmokables: Higher Cigarette Taxes Mean More Bootlegging.
  • Etc. A nanosecond or so Googling pops up 207,000 results, if you don't like any of those.

  • Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

    Damnit. Did I just delete my anti-penguin post or is this just part of the vast right-wing conspiracy to keep the truth of the penguin menace hidden from voters.


    bugleyman wrote:
    brad bender wrote:

    Incorrect. Your analysis may be accurate to the megawealthy such as Gates, Buffet, Ellison, etc. It has no bearing on the other 9.9999% of the wealth in this country.

    Most "extremely wealthy" people in this country make between 500M and 2MM a year, a band where income taxes are incredibly important. The primary reason still comes from the fact that capital gains are still able to be managed. You rarely *need* to sell a capital asset, so you don't need to recognize the gain. Additionally, there are alot of ways to offset capital gains and manipulate them and the strategies are relatively simple and well known.

    So again, in my profession, I hear alot about income taxes and a whole lot less about capital gains taxes.

    If you actually read the study, you'll see that the income progression from earned -> capital is actually pretty smooth as one climbs the income ladder. As to your professional experience: If you prefer to lend more weight to anecdotal evidence than hard data, that's your perogative, but I certainly don't.

    Your "hard data" fails to take into consideration the recongition for accounting purposes of that wealth and how it would change in reality according to tax code. I am sure at given rates the data is accurate, it however cannot indicate the patterns and things going on behind the scenes of those numbers.

    This is where someone in the industry will simply never grasp it. Unless you are in high end finance, accounting, m/a, or pe you simply won't see it. So yes, I will take my real life experience over your internet founded data, anyday.


    Sebastian wrote:
    calling your opponent a nazi

    Frankly, I'm surprised it took this long.

    Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

    Moff Rimmer wrote:
    Come on. Everyone knows that Democrats are behind global warming. Penguins are just the proof.

    What?!?! That's a damn lie. You know who else believed the penguins knew the truth about global warming:

    Spoiler:

    Fidel Castro!


    Xpltvdeleted wrote:
    brad bender wrote:

    Sure, but let me know the next time a hospital tries to collect from someone in Section8 housing. Hospitals budget something called "Indigent Care", where they just write it off because they know they won't see a dime. Also, they will have medicaid. So, in either case their medical care is a big fat ZERO, paid for by the taxpayer.

    Trust me, wife/mother/sister are physicians and advise hospital boards.

    That doesn't make the debt any less the patient's. Hospitals may budget for it and not try too hard to collect it, but they sure as hell aren't going to tell Bob McPoorguy that he doesn't have to pay it back. But again, that's a subject for another topic.

    Point of what I was getting at, is the tax structure probably does need to be changed, but not in a way that is going to disproportionately favor the wealthy...that, however is about as likely as me having a threesome with Halley Berry and Rihanna.

    First off, the hospital DOES tell him that. They then send him to the financial aid department and get the medicaid docs filled out. They then cut him loose and write off the debt. This is how it is done in practice. A business, whether it is a hospital or otherwise cannot afford to spend money on a debt they simply will never collect.

    I don't think anyone on the "wealthy" side is saying they want to pay less taxes, it is that they want the poor/middle class to have skin in the game. More importantly they don't want to keep seeing large numbers of poor people voting and demanding things that they don't have to pay for.

    Look around. This administration is doing nothing but trying to take wealth from the top 20% and give it to the bottom 40%. The middle 40% are just trying to stay out of it the best they can. The problem is when the top 20% feel like they are getting shafted they shut down the economy.


    bugleyman wrote:
    Xpltvdeleted wrote:
    That doesn't make the debt any less the patient's. Hospitals may budget for it and not try too hard to collect it, but they sure as hell aren't going to tell Bob McPoorguy that he doesn't have to pay it back. But again, that's a subject for another topic.

    And of course the financial consequences make it still harder for Bob McPoorguy to climb off the s#%& heap. As long as you except the premise that poor people are poor because they deserve it, the whole thing becomes much easier to swallow.

    Xpltvdeleted wrote:


    Point of what I was getting at, is the tax structure probably does need to be changed, but not in a way that is going to disproportionately favor the wealthy...that, however is about as likely as me having a threesome with Halley Berry and Rihanna.

    That's the beauty of a consumption tax: It doesn't care where the money came from.

    His point is that a consumption, flat, or VAT is all a regressive tax and that it is damaging to the lower classes. Whether you think that is fair or not is another topic, but the point is that if you implemented a VAT instead of, or in conjunction with an income tax it would put the lower classes in a worse position than they are in right now.

    Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

    Godwin's Law Nazi wrote:
    Sebastian wrote:
    calling your opponent a nazi
    Frankly, I'm surprised it took this long.

    Satanist.


    bugleyman wrote:
    Charlie Bell wrote:
    bugleyman wrote:
    Xpltvdeleted wrote:
    Poor people are...stupid...
    Naturally...otherwise they wouldn't be poor, would they?
    And there's the root of statism. That the unwashed masses are just too dumb to run their own lives, and clearly they must be governed by their betters for their own good.
    Interestingly, I view it as the root of economic Darwinism. The poor are just too dumb/lazy to ever amount to anything. They deserve what they get, so why empathize?

    Good way to get people to listen to you, antagonize and act immature and generally unrealistic. If you want to roll that line of logic down the ole' hill then why not just cut off welfare/medicaid and see what happens to society?

    There is a point where you have to help people out and while I agree we are past that point, you cannot generalize the fact that all those who are poor deserve it.


    lastknightleft wrote:
    brad bender wrote:
    lastknightleft wrote:
    Xpltvdeleted wrote:
    Poor people are too stupid to comprehend programs that would allow them to take advantage of rebates, so we need to make it easier on them? Wow... Not to mention that when the section of the poor population that is smart enough to do so files their taxes properly, they generally get MORE money back than they paid in, so any increase in tax (even if it is offset to a certain degree--i'm assuming a break even point) will cause them to lose money.
    oh okay, so I must be one of those stupid poor, because despite the fact that I've had to live off of ramen noodles and even then went days without eating (other than family who were nice enough to give me money to buy groceries)because I had rent to pay, I never once got more back for my taxes than I put in. And hey, I filed online using all those government tools to make it possible to get the best rebate possible. Hmm, I guess the government was just out to get me.

    FIFTY PERCENT of this country pays nothing in Federal Income tax, half. 46% of those 50% get money than $250 back. So, just to summarize.

    You didn't pay anything in federal income taxes.
    You got a refund for more than you paid in, meaning you had a net gain in taxes.

    Conclusion: You recieved welfare.

    Wow did you just tell me that I paid no federal income tax, or that I got back more than I paid in? because I have pay stubs and tax forms that prove you are wrong. So tell me again what I did or didn't do?

    "you" is a hypothetical generalization, relax sport.

    Sovereign Court

    Kirth Gersen wrote:
    lastknightleft wrote:
    source for that claim on #1?

    Source for the claim that the sky is sometimes blue? New York residency back when I was a smoker would be personal anecdote and hence without value, so if you want links, try some of these:

  • Cigarette Taxes, Black Markets, and Crime: Lessons from New York’s 50-Year Losing Battle
  • Big Tobacco's New York Black Market
  • The Unsmokables: Higher Cigarette Taxes Mean More Bootlegging.
  • Etc. A nanosecond or so Googling pops up 207,000 results, if you don't like any of those.
  • I wasn't arguing that there wasn't a lot of bootlegging going on, it was your claim that most of the cigarettes are bootlegged that I was asking for a source on. Even the links you gave the highest I saw was 25% of one companies sales in the state were bootlegged. I wasn't doubting the existence of a blackmarket for them, just that it was MOST of the cigarette sales, and I haven't seen proof of that yet either but I haven't read them all in their entirety yet, I will peruse more when I have time.


    brad bender wrote:
    They then cut him loose and write off the debt. This is how it is done in practice.

    Recently, I was late paying a $5 difference that insurance didn't cover. The next week, a collection agency was knocking at my door. I am not making this up. A lot of providers don't write it off -- so making a blanket statement that they all do is false, even if SOME do.


    Why...

    I believe the children are our are future
    Teach them well and let them lead the way
    Show them all the beauty they possess inside
    Give them a sense of pride to make it easier
    Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be
    Everybody searching for a hero
    People need someone to look up to
    I never found anyone to fulfill my needs
    A lonely place to be
    So I learned to depend on me

    I decided long ago, never to walk in anyone's shadows
    If I fail, if I succeed
    At least I live as I believe
    No matter what they take from me
    They can't take away my dignity
    Because the greatest love of all
    Is happening to me
    I found the greatest love of all
    Inside of me
    The greatest love of all
    Is easy to achieve
    Learning to love yourself
    It is the greatest love of all

    I believe the children are our future
    Teach them well and let them lead the way
    Show them all the beauty they possess inside
    Give them a sense of pride to make it easier
    Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be

    And if by chance, that special place
    That you've been dreaming of
    Leads you to a lonely place
    Find your strength in love


    brad bender wrote:

    First off, the hospital DOES tell him that. They then send him to the financial aid department and get the medicaid docs filled out. They then cut him loose and write off the debt. This is how it is done in practice. A business, whether it is a hospital or otherwise cannot afford to spend money on a debt they simply will never collect.

    I don't think anyone on the "wealthy" side is saying they want to pay less taxes, it is that they want the poor/middle class to have skin in the game. More importantly they don't want to keep seeing large numbers of poor people voting and demanding things that they don't have to pay for.

    Look around. This administration is doing nothing but trying to take wealth from the top 20% and give it to the bottom 40%. The middle 40% are just trying to stay out of it the best they can. The problem is when the top 20% feel like they are getting shafted they shut down the economy.

    Ok, Mr. Galt. ;)

    Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

    brad bender wrote:
    bugleyman wrote:
    Charlie Bell wrote:
    bugleyman wrote:
    Xpltvdeleted wrote:
    Poor people are...stupid...
    Naturally...otherwise they wouldn't be poor, would they?
    And there's the root of statism. That the unwashed masses are just too dumb to run their own lives, and clearly they must be governed by their betters for their own good.
    Interestingly, I view it as the root of economic Darwinism. The poor are just too dumb/lazy to ever amount to anything. They deserve what they get, so why empathize?

    Good way to get people to listen to you, antagonize and act immature and generally unrealistic. If you want to roll that line of logic down the ole' hill then why not just cut off welfare/medicaid and see what happens to society?

    There is a point where you have to help people out and while I agree we are past that point, you cannot generalize the fact that all those who are poor deserve it.

    I think you may have failed a detect sarcasm check...


    Bitter Thorn wrote:
    Secretlyreplacedwith wrote:
    Sebastian wrote:

    Can we use a less pejorative term than "stupid poor"? I prefer "unwashed masses," but I can also live with "primitive screwheads."

    I hear they make excellent skeet. Can we shoot them with our boom stick?
    "I love my peasants! Pull!"

    wild finger pointing MINARCHY AT WORK!!!!

    Sovereign Court

    brad bender wrote:
    lastknightleft wrote:
    brad bender wrote:
    lastknightleft wrote:
    Xpltvdeleted wrote:
    Poor people are too stupid to comprehend programs that would allow them to take advantage of rebates, so we need to make it easier on them? Wow... Not to mention that when the section of the poor population that is smart enough to do so files their taxes properly, they generally get MORE money back than they paid in, so any increase in tax (even if it is offset to a certain degree--i'm assuming a break even point) will cause them to lose money.
    oh okay, so I must be one of those stupid poor, because despite the fact that I've had to live off of ramen noodles and even then went days without eating (other than family who were nice enough to give me money to buy groceries)because I had rent to pay, I never once got more back for my taxes than I put in. And hey, I filed online using all those government tools to make it possible to get the best rebate possible. Hmm, I guess the government was just out to get me.

    FIFTY PERCENT of this country pays nothing in Federal Income tax, half. 46% of those 50% get money than $250 back. So, just to summarize.

    You didn't pay anything in federal income taxes.
    You got a refund for more than you paid in, meaning you had a net gain in taxes.

    Conclusion: You recieved welfare.

    Wow did you just tell me that I paid no federal income tax, or that I got back more than I paid in? because I have pay stubs and tax forms that prove you are wrong. So tell me again what I did or didn't do?
    "you" is a hypothetical generalization, relax sport.

    okay, but remember if you quote someone and then say "you..." they'll think you're talking about them.


    brad bender wrote:
    bugleyman wrote:
    Charlie Bell wrote:
    bugleyman wrote:
    Xpltvdeleted wrote:
    Poor people are...stupid...
    Naturally...otherwise they wouldn't be poor, would they?
    And there's the root of statism. That the unwashed masses are just too dumb to run their own lives, and clearly they must be governed by their betters for their own good.
    Interestingly, I view it as the root of economic Darwinism. The poor are just too dumb/lazy to ever amount to anything. They deserve what they get, so why empathize?

    Good way to get people to listen to you, antagonize and act immature and generally unrealistic. If you want to roll that line of logic down the ole' hill then why not just cut off welfare/medicaid and see what happens to society?

    There is a point where you have to help people out and while I agree we are past that point, you cannot generalize the fact that all those who are poor deserve it.

    Sarcasm -- look into it. ;)


    Kirth Gersen wrote:
    brad bender wrote:
    They then cut him loose and write off the debt. This is how it is done in practice.
    Recently, I was late paying a $5 difference that insurance didn't cover. The next week, a collection agency was knocking at my door. I am not making this up. A lot of providers don't write it off -- so making a blanket statement that they all do is false, even if SOME do.

    Depends on your collectibility. If you were on medicaid/welfare I bet you wouldn't get that. That is my point. Those who are so poor as to be in the "welfare" category are not being harassed by collection agencies.

    Can't get blood from a stone.

    Liberty's Edge

    Kirth Gersen wrote:
    brad bender wrote:
    They then cut him loose and write off the debt. This is how it is done in practice.
    Recently, I was late paying a $5 difference that insurance didn't cover. The next week, a collection agency was knocking at my door. I am not making this up. A lot of providers don't write it off -- so making a blanket statement that they all do is false, even if SOME do.

    +1 very rarely, if at all, do they simply write off debt. For one, how are they going to know whose debt to write off? I still get letters and an unpaid debt still shows up on my credit report over an "unpaid" ER visit that happend 7 years ago (I had insurance, they didn't file correctly and no amount of calling the hospital and the insurance co would get it resolved so I decided to stop wasting my time). Anecdotal? Yes. But you'd think that if a hospital was in the practice of writing off debt, they wouldn't wait 7 years to do so.


    lastknightleft wrote:
    "you" is a hypothetical generalization, relax sport.
    okay, but remember if you quote someone and then say "you..." they'll think you're talking about them.

    Crazy talk


    lastknightleft wrote:
    I wasn't arguing that there wasn't a lot of bootlegging going on, it was your claim that most of the cigarettes are bootlegged that I was asking for a source on. Even the links you gave the highest I saw was 25% of one companies sales in the state were bootlegged.

    Sort of hard to quantify the black market ones, since they're by definition not sold above-board. I didn't know anyone except college students who actually bought legitimate cigarettes. Everyone who drove to the South brought back a trunkful of smokes with them, and I often used to see whole truckloads being brought in.


    brad bender wrote:
    Kirth Gersen wrote:
    brad bender wrote:
    They then cut him loose and write off the debt. This is how it is done in practice.
    Recently, I was late paying a $5 difference that insurance didn't cover. The next week, a collection agency was knocking at my door. I am not making this up. A lot of providers don't write it off -- so making a blanket statement that they all do is false, even if SOME do.

    Depends on your collectibility. If you were on medicaid/welfare I bet you wouldn't get that. That is my point. Those who are so poor as to be in the "welfare" category are not being harassed by collection agencies.

    Can't get blood from a stone.

    That's not true. My late mother in law still gets letters, and we recieved phone calls regarding her financial status before we changed our number(unrelated reason), and she was on medicaid and welfare in her final days due to cancer.

    Sovereign Court

    lastknightleft wrote:
    Kirth Gersen wrote:
    lastknightleft wrote:
    source for that claim on #1?

    Source for the claim that the sky is sometimes blue? New York residency back when I was a smoker would be personal anecdote and hence without value, so if you want links, try some of these:

  • Cigarette Taxes, Black Markets, and Crime: Lessons from New York’s 50-Year Losing Battle
  • Big Tobacco's New York Black Market
  • The Unsmokables: Higher Cigarette Taxes Mean More Bootlegging.
  • Etc. A nanosecond or so Googling pops up 207,000 results, if you don't like any of those.
  • I wasn't arguing that there wasn't a lot of bootlegging going on, it was your claim that most of the cigarettes are bootlegged that I was asking for a source on. Even the links you gave the highest I saw was 25% of one companies sales in the state were bootlegged. I wasn't doubting the existence of a blackmarket for them, just that it was MOST of the cigarette sales, and I haven't seen proof of that yet either but I haven't read them all in their entirety yet, I will peruse more when I have time.

    Largest claim I've come across is 1 out of 3 cigarrettes is bootlegged, that's a lot, but that doesn't qualify as "most"

    Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

    Freehold DM wrote:
    brad bender wrote:
    Kirth Gersen wrote:
    brad bender wrote:
    They then cut him loose and write off the debt. This is how it is done in practice.
    Recently, I was late paying a $5 difference that insurance didn't cover. The next week, a collection agency was knocking at my door. I am not making this up. A lot of providers don't write it off -- so making a blanket statement that they all do is false, even if SOME do.

    Depends on your collectibility. If you were on medicaid/welfare I bet you wouldn't get that. That is my point. Those who are so poor as to be in the "welfare" category are not being harassed by collection agencies.

    Can't get blood from a stone.

    That's not true. My late mother in law still gets letters, and we recieved phone calls regarding her financial status before we changed our number(unrelated reason), and she was on medicaid and welfare in her final days due to cancer.

    I have a similar anecdotal experience relating to a family member and bill collectors (including hospitals and the state, which was after child support even though the person had been unemployed for the better part of a decade).


    lastknightleft wrote:
    Largest claim I've come across is 1 out of 3 cigarrettes is bootlegged, that's a lot, but that doesn't qualify as "most"

    Please read my reply before you ask again. 1 out of 3 is the ones that can get counted. How do you count the billions of packs trucked up illegally from Carolina and sold below the radar?

    Sovereign Court

    Kirth Gersen wrote:
    lastknightleft wrote:
    Largest claim I've come across is 1 out of 3 cigarrettes is bootlegged, that's a lot, but that doesn't qualify as "most"
    Please read my reply before you ask again. 1 out of 3 is the ones that can get counted. How do you count the billions of packs trucked up illegally from Carolina and sold below the radar?

    Your post came in while I was typing, it didn't exist when I started typing that post.

    Liberty's Edge

    bugleyman wrote:
    houstonderek wrote:
    bugleyman wrote:
    There are at least as many posts in this thread purporting to explain what "what progressives believe" by non-progressives than there are by progressives. Make of that what you will.
    Kinda like the "What Conservatives Believe" thread? But in reverse? Make of that what you will.

    How did I know that post was coming? I could have typed it for you verbatim. Lol.

    But yeah...exactly like that. What's your point? Two wrongs? An eye for an eye?

    More like, good for the goose, tit for tat. If you don't like it now, shouldn't have done it then.


    Freehold DM wrote:
    brad bender wrote:
    Kirth Gersen wrote:
    brad bender wrote:
    They then cut him loose and write off the debt. This is how it is done in practice.
    Recently, I was late paying a $5 difference that insurance didn't cover. The next week, a collection agency was knocking at my door. I am not making this up. A lot of providers don't write it off -- so making a blanket statement that they all do is false, even if SOME do.

    Depends on your collectibility. If you were on medicaid/welfare I bet you wouldn't get that. That is my point. Those who are so poor as to be in the "welfare" category are not being harassed by collection agencies.

    Can't get blood from a stone.

    That's not true. My late mother in law still gets letters, and we recieved phone calls regarding her financial status before we changed our number(unrelated reason), and she was on medicaid and welfare in her final days due to cancer.

    I think some of the disconnect here comes from the source of the debt. For instance a $500 lab bill may get "written off" by being sold to a collections agency at a fraction of it's value depending on the state. In some states that collection agency may then resell the same debt when they can't collect and so on. The lab writes the difference off and may get some other compensation from the state.

    A $50,000 hospital bill, on the other hand, in Colorado gets written off relatively quickly. In the past someone would have to declare bankruptcy, and I have seen first hand hospitals literally beg people to declare bankruptcy and not even try to pay the bill.

    This was more than 10 years ago, so I'm sure there have been some changes, but I gather it still runs like this.

    I know after my wife died we spent months sorting out the various lab, supply, and home hospice bills. The hospital and hospice bills were the easiest to resolve with the insurance company. The labs and such were pretty inconsistent. Some waited months to bill us for co-pays.

    I hope that helps.


    On second thought, BT, if you still want to engage me, start another thread. I have a 7 year old at home who has better manners than this thread.


    CourtFool wrote:
    On second thought, BT, if you still want to engage me, start another thread. I have a 7 year old at home who has better manners than this thread.

    Do we need a what do minarchists believe thread? ;)


    Xpltvdeleted wrote:
    Bitter Thorn wrote:
    Secretlyreplacedwith wrote:
    Sebastian wrote:

    Can we use a less pejorative term than "stupid poor"? I prefer "unwashed masses," but I can also live with "primitive screwheads."

    I hear they make excellent skeet. Can we shoot them with our boom stick?
    "I love my peasants! Pull!"
    I just had a mental image of Harsk astride a harley, shooting kobolds like skeet. LOL

    Well there are worse mental images to deal with. :)

    Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

    CourtFool wrote:
    On second thought, BT, if you still want to engage me, start another thread. I have a 7 year old at home who has better manners than this thread.

    Call the new thread "Commoner Builds". No one will bother you then.


    houstonderek wrote:


    More like, good for the goose, tit for tat. If you don't like it now, shouldn't have done it then.

    That wouldn't pass muster if my 11-year old said it.

    Even so, did I "do it then?" I don't recall coming into the thread and out of the blue and restating people's positions in a "clever," mocking way. Maybe I did -- can you dig up an example? If so, I'd be happy to apologize -- would you?

    Edit: Forget it. It may have taken me a while, but I've finally learned that talking to you is exactly as useful as a bucket of steaming hamster vomit.

    1 to 50 of 546 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / What do Progressives Believe? All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.