Mufasa and Gambit

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Why are you posting about Soc. Sec. Taxes?[/quote]

Cause its the same difference?

You cannot get paid more than you produce and your employer does not care under what flag that cost arises.

Whatever the cost of employing you happens to be, you must produce that and more or else you are a shitty investment.

BTW, you carry the most part of corporate taxes too, if you are employed by one. That was up in the air for a long time, and the money was on the owners, the customers or the employees, turns out the employees have won yet again!

Its not called the dismal science for nothing.

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Why are you posting about Soc. Sec. Taxes?[/quote]

Cause its the same difference?

You cannot get paid more than you produce and your employer does not care under what flag that cost arises.

Whatever the cost of employing you happens to be, you must produce that and more or else you are a shitty investment.

BTW, you carry the most part of corporate taxes too, if you are employed by one. That was up in the air for a long time, and the money was on the owners, the customers or the employees, turns out the employees have won yet again!

Its not called the dismal science for nothing. [/quote]

Well I believe employers are paying like 60%-80,% give or take, of the premium. So, I have no idea what you’re talking about. Take the additional cost, put the percent to it, they pay more.

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Why are you posting about Soc. Sec. Taxes?[/quote]

Cause its the same difference?

You cannot get paid more than you produce and your employer does not care under what flag that cost arises.

Whatever the cost of employing you happens to be, you must produce that and more or else you are a shitty investment.

BTW, you carry the most part of corporate taxes too, if you are employed by one. That was up in the air for a long time, and the money was on the owners, the customers or the employees, turns out the employees have won yet again!

Its not called the dismal science for nothing. [/quote]

LOL!!!
No dumb-dumb, that shit is passed along to the consumers. If the company tried to make the employees carry all that debt, we’d owe them money.

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]milod wrote:
Feel free to point out the error. If you can. [/quote]

The money trail, dude. You pay a fraction of the insurance cost of your benefit, the organization, or in this case the church, pays the rest.[/quote]

No, they dont.

[/quote]

Yes they do.[/quote]

No they dont and, FTR, Milton Friedman is with me.

Pisses me off that people fall for the easiest tricks in the book. [/quote]

Yeah! Employees pay Social Security, therefore employees really carry all the insurance premiums, not the 25% we actually really carry!
Clearly somebody from a single-payer system knows exactly what our system is like.

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

From there, I pretty much see it as a zero sum.[/quote]

No, It’s not even close man.
[/quote]

K, what am I missing, then?

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

From there, I pretty much see it as a zero sum.[/quote]

No, It’s not even close man.
[/quote]

K, what am I missing, then?[/quote]

Very simple.

Most adults with working sex organs have sex (or close to it).

Contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies.

The prevention of unwanted pregnancies lessens abortions and children in foster homes.

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Why are you posting about Soc. Sec. Taxes?[/quote]

Cause its the same difference?

You cannot get paid more than you produce and your employer does not care under what flag that cost arises.

Whatever the cost of employing you happens to be, you must produce that and more or else you are a shitty investment.

BTW, you carry the most part of corporate taxes too, if you are employed by one. That was up in the air for a long time, and the money was on the owners, the customers or the employees, turns out the employees have won yet again!

Its not called the dismal science for nothing. [/quote]

LOL!!!
No dumb-dumb, that shit is passed along to the consumers. If the company tried to make the employees carry all that debt, we’d owe them money.[/quote]

Yeah well, dumb-dumb, there is a study out that says you are wrong,.

But hey, you have an opinion, that is swell.

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

From there, I pretty much see it as a zero sum.[/quote]

No, It’s not even close man.
[/quote]

K, what am I missing, then?[/quote]

Very simple.

Most adults with working sex organs have sex (or close to it).

Contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies.

The prevention of unwanted pregnancies lessens abortions and children in foster homes.

[/quote]

And that has what to do with insurance?

Do people accidentally drip and land in vaginas?

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]milod wrote:
Feel free to point out the error. If you can. [/quote]

The money trail, dude. You pay a fraction of the insurance cost of your benefit, the organization, or in this case the church, pays the rest.[/quote]

No, they dont.

[/quote]

Yes they do.[/quote]

No they dont and, FTR, Milton Friedman is with me.

Pisses me off that people fall for the easiest tricks in the book. [/quote]

Yeah! Employees pay Social Security, therefore employees really carry all the insurance premiums, not the 25% we actually really carry!
Clearly somebody from a single-payer system knows exactly what our system is like.[/quote]

Dont be an idiot.

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

From there, I pretty much see it as a zero sum.[/quote]

No, It’s not even close man.
[/quote]

K, what am I missing, then?[/quote]

Very simple.

Most adults with working sex organs have sex (or close to it).

Contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies.

The prevention of unwanted pregnancies lessens abortions and children in foster homes.

[/quote]

And that has what to do with insurance?

Do people accidentally drip and land in vaginas?[/quote]

Go back and read what we’re talking about.

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

From there, I pretty much see it as a zero sum.[/quote]

No, It’s not even close man.
[/quote]

K, what am I missing, then?[/quote]

Very simple.

Most adults with working sex organs have sex (or close to it).

Contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies.

The prevention of unwanted pregnancies lessens abortions and children in foster homes.

[/quote]
So get on your bike and pick up a pack of trojans if you’re so inclined.

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Why are you posting about Soc. Sec. Taxes?[/quote]

Cause its the same difference?

You cannot get paid more than you produce and your employer does not care under what flag that cost arises.

Whatever the cost of employing you happens to be, you must produce that and more or else you are a shitty investment.

BTW, you carry the most part of corporate taxes too, if you are employed by one. That was up in the air for a long time, and the money was on the owners, the customers or the employees, turns out the employees have won yet again!

Its not called the dismal science for nothing. [/quote]

Well I believe employers are paying like 60%-80,% give or take, of the premium. So, I have no idea what you’re talking about. Take the additional cost, put the percent to it, they pay more.[/quote]

Look:

Lets us say you buy a truck.

That truck costs you. You have to pay gas and tires maintenance and taxes and whatnot.

There is a bottom line, this is what it costs you.

It better make more than what it costs you, or else you wont buy it, because you would be losing money.

Now, you are similar to that truck. I dont care and neither does your employer what you call the money he pays you. You can call it a salary, witheld income tax, the employers share to whatever, it does not matter, you better make more money for him than he pays you or else you are out.

Bottom line, it comes out of your paycheck.

WHERE ELSE WOULD IT COME FROM?

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

From there, I pretty much see it as a zero sum.[/quote]

No, It’s not even close man.
[/quote]

K, what am I missing, then?[/quote]

Very simple.

Most adults with working sex organs have sex (or close to it).

Contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies.

The prevention of unwanted pregnancies lessens abortions and children in foster homes.

[/quote]

And that has what to do with insurance?

Do people accidentally drip and land in vaginas?[/quote]

Go back and read what we’re talking about.[/quote]

Go back and think what you are demanding.

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

From there, I pretty much see it as a zero sum.[/quote]

No, It’s not even close man.
[/quote]

K, what am I missing, then?[/quote]

Very simple.

Most adults with working sex organs have sex (or close to it).

Contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies.

The prevention of unwanted pregnancies lessens abortions and children in foster homes.

[/quote]
So get on your bike and pick up a pack of trojans if you’re so inclined.
[/quote]

What does that have to do with my point?

I’m arguing that the benefits of contraceptives outweigh the negatives. Pat said it was a zero sum, I told him he was wrong.

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

From there, I pretty much see it as a zero sum.[/quote]

No, It’s not even close man.
[/quote]

K, what am I missing, then?[/quote]

Very simple.

Most adults with working sex organs have sex (or close to it).

Contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies.

The prevention of unwanted pregnancies lessens abortions and children in foster homes.

[/quote]
So get on your bike and pick up a pack of trojans if you’re so inclined.
[/quote]

What does that have to do with my point?

I’m arguing that the benefits of contraceptives outweigh the negatives. Pat said it was a zero sum, I told him he was wrong.
[/quote]

Well, if that is so, people would have a clear incentive to get it for themselves.

.

nm

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

From there, I pretty much see it as a zero sum.[/quote]

No, It’s not even close man.
[/quote]

K, what am I missing, then?[/quote]

Very simple.

Most adults with working sex organs have sex (or close to it).

Contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies.

The prevention of unwanted pregnancies lessens abortions and children in foster homes.

[/quote]
So get on your bike and pick up a pack of trojans if you’re so inclined.
[/quote]

What does that have to do with my point?

I’m arguing that the benefits of contraceptives outweigh the negatives. Pat said it was a zero sum, I told him he was wrong.
[/quote]

So go get your trojans…

But around 2050, when the nation of retired, single or divorced, childless, old folks can’t cash their government checks, or use their government services, because their demographic growth grossly outstripped the barely above-board replacement rate (if still even that high, which I seriously doubt)…

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

From there, I pretty much see it as a zero sum.[/quote]

No, It’s not even close man.
[/quote]

K, what am I missing, then?[/quote]

Very simple.

Most adults with working sex organs have sex (or close to it).

Contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies.

The prevention of unwanted pregnancies lessens abortions and children in foster homes.

[/quote]
So get on your bike and pick up a pack of trojans if you’re so inclined.
[/quote]

What does that have to do with my point?

I’m arguing that the benefits of contraceptives outweigh the negatives. Pat said it was a zero sum, I told him he was wrong.
[/quote]

So go get your trojans…

But around 2050, when the nation of retired, single or divorced, childless, old folks can’t cash their government checks, or use their government services, because their demographic growth grossly outstripped the barely above-board replacement rate (if still even that high, which I seriously doubt)…
[/quote]

Immigration.

Goodbye white babies.

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

From there, I pretty much see it as a zero sum.[/quote]

No, It’s not even close man.
[/quote]

K, what am I missing, then?[/quote]

Very simple.

Most adults with working sex organs have sex (or close to it).

Contraception prevents unwanted pregnancies.

The prevention of unwanted pregnancies lessens abortions and children in foster homes.

[/quote]
So get on your bike and pick up a pack of trojans if you’re so inclined.
[/quote]

What does that have to do with my point?

I’m arguing that the benefits of contraceptives outweigh the negatives. Pat said it was a zero sum, I told him he was wrong.
[/quote]

So go get your trojans…

But around 2050, when the nation of retired, single or divorced, childless, old folks can’t cash their government checks, or use their government services, because their demographic growth grossly outstripped the barely above-board replacement rate (if still even that high, which I seriously doubt)…
[/quote]

Immigration.

Goodbye white babies.[/quote]

That’s pretty much an admission that the culture/society is a Darwinian dead end. I credit you for the honesty.