[quote]MarvelGirl wrote:
It’s really easy to say who the fuck cares until they start taxing something that affects YOU.
Tanning is obviously unhealthy to the general public so it should be taxed, right?
Yeah, well the way most of us on this website live is OBVIOUSLY UNHEALTHY TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC TOO.
Just wait for the red meat taxes, protein powder taxes and getting taxed for weighing too goddamn much even if you have low bodyfat. Then maybe some of you will give a shit about losing your freedom.
Edit: Oh and my new tits are going to cost 5% more because of this bullshit. Somebody please explain to me how my having bigger tits hurts the goddamn public.[/quote]
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn?t speak up,
because I wasn?t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn?t speak up,
because I wasn?t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn?t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
by Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945
yeah I heard that elective plastic surgeries would not be taxed.
Isnt the argument that higher incedenced of skin cancer raises health care costs for everyone. More resources, more doctor time consumed. Higher statistical incidence = higher insurance premiums etc.
I feel like its kind of selective and heavy handed but it doesn’t bother me when I consider how (generally) pointless it is. Just pay the extra 10%.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
I’m just trying to figure out where in the HR 3590 (or is it H.R. 4872?) this provision was buried, since I hadn’t heard about it before this post. It seems like people are interpreting it correctly as I would like to think it would be hard for that many news outlets to be so far off base, but I just wanted to check the facts myself.
Have you read the legislation and interpreted it yourself, carbiduis? Or just read ABOUT it and how they think it will be interpreted?[/quote]
Yes, i did open up the pdf file on sunday and i looked at a few pages of the 2310 page monster. I could not understand what the fuck any of it said, it was designed for abuse. There is no way that shit made sense…so im assuming you read it? And understood every finite detail? I guess you just missed the page that contained the info on the tanning tax.
[quote]Eli B wrote:
My perception is that the agri-lobby would bitch slap a meat tax because there would be significant public outrage and they are big business. The tanning lobby is slightly less powerful.[/quote]
The people who write laws in this country (and many others) are all lawyers. They are written in such a way that only other lawyers can understand them. Unless it is tax code; then (some) accountants can understand them, eventually. This keeps lots of lawyers in business (as does the marriage/divorce industry, but that is another topic).
As of 2009, the US Tax code is 16,845 pages. I’m sure its more now. Tell me how that helps this nation?
Well, all I can say is I hope they start taxing the crap out of fast food and processed food too…Lord help them if they start taxing meat. Think we can set up like a rebellion? Thibs for president? Anyone!?!
Actually maybe MarvelGirl would like to run? Then you could be in office and get some political funds to help pay for the extra ‘perks’.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
I’m just trying to figure out where in the HR 3590 (or is it H.R. 4872?) this provision was buried, since I hadn’t heard about it before this post. It seems like people are interpreting it correctly as I would like to think it would be hard for that many news outlets to be so far off base, but I just wanted to check the facts myself.
Have you read the legislation and interpreted it yourself, carbiduis? Or just read ABOUT it and how they think it will be interpreted?[/quote]
Yes, i did open up the pdf file on sunday and i looked at a few pages of the 2310 page monster. I could not understand what the fuck any of it said, it was designed for abuse. There is no way that shit made sense…so im assuming you read it? And understood every finite detail? I guess you just missed the page that contained the info on the tanning tax. [/quote]
No I haven’t yet. Like you, I found most of it baffling, but I’m trying my best, though with an engineering degree it is maddeningly frustrating. Hell it was hard enough even finding out what HR bill was actually passed. The media has just called it “health care reform” or whatever, and most outlets didn’t even bother listing the actual number of the bill that was passed.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
I’m just trying to figure out where in the HR 3590 (or is it H.R. 4872?) this provision was buried, since I hadn’t heard about it before this post. It seems like people are interpreting it correctly as I would like to think it would be hard for that many news outlets to be so far off base, but I just wanted to check the facts myself.
Yes, i did open up the pdf file on sunday and i looked at a few pages of the 2310 page monster. I could not understand what the fuck any of it said, it was designed for abuse. There is no way that shit made sense…so im assuming you read it? And understood every finite detail? I guess you just missed the page that contained the info on the tanning tax. [/quote]
No I haven’t yet. Like you, I found most of it baffling, but I’m trying my best, though with an engineering degree it is maddeningly frustrating. Hell it was hard enough even finding out what HR bill was actually passed. The media has just called it “health care reform” or whatever, and most outlets didn’t even bother listing the actual number of the bill that was passed.[/quote]
What a coincidence, I’ve got about a year left till i get my mechanical enigneering degree. btw if you didnt find out already its the “H.R. 3590” bill. Heres a link to the bill (pdf.)
We vote for our legislators. Anybody that trusts a corporation is an idiot. Goverment,the legislators and beauracracy , want to help. Yes I agree that is not always a good thing. We are all afraid of the bleak un private future. But the government is not more likely to cause that. Our elected legislators would not let that happen and we all damn well know that corporations would and already have. It is funny that the people against health care reform are the ones selling out our freedoms. Air security, unrestrained tsa searches, zero tolerance gulag schools, court mandated anger management classes, neo mcarthyist detention camps and their blatant suspension of suspected terrorists rights. Who is next? And you want to tell me how people getting medicine when previously the nurses dragged them to the curb and die will ‘start’ to lessen privacy.
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn?t speak up,
because I wasn?t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn?t speak up,
because I wasn?t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn?t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
by Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945
[/quote]
This is by far the most important thing mentioned in this thread. Taxing an individuals personal freedom is a slippery slope down to a mindless state of sheeple. If an individual wants to take risks with their health, it should be entirely up to them to the extent that they do not infringe on anyone else’s enjoyment of their respective freedoms.
[quote]eremesu wrote:
We vote for our legislators. Anybody that trusts a corporation is an idiot. Goverment,the legislators and beauracracy , want to help. Yes I agree that is not always a good thing. We are all afraid of the bleak un private future. But the government is not more likely to cause that. Our elected legislators would not let that happen and we all damn well know that corporations would and already have. It is funny that the people against health care reform are the ones selling out our freedoms. Air security, unrestrained tsa searches, zero tolerance gulag schools, court mandated anger management classes, neo mcarthyist detention camps and their blatant suspension of suspected terrorists rights. Who is next? And you want to tell me how people getting medicine when previously the nurses dragged them to the curb and die will ‘start’ to lessen privacy. [/quote]
The government is not more likely to cause a bleak and unprivate future? really? I’ll trust a coporation over the government anyday. Corporations need money to survive, its that simple. The government needs much more, trust and control, Im more afraid of that and the mechanism used to achieve it.
-Air security, NO ONE IS MAKING YOU RIDE THE PLANE. It is not an absolute essential funciton of our lives, i havent been on one in years. If you want the PRIVELAGE to ride the plane, you take your shoes off and let them have a look.
-I have no sympathy for terrorist, i feel sorry for you if you do.
-“It is funny that the people against health care reform are the ones selling out our freedoms. zero tolerance gulag schools, court mandated anger management classes” you’re gonna have to get real specific here about these.
-Do you have any footage or proof that nurses were “dragging people to the curb to die”? I lol’d a little bit when i read that one
-Once again, EVERYTHING you do can be related to your health. If its now their job to control your health, its now their job to control your life.
I had an entire post written out, basically saying how much so many of you are idiots, but then I realized that, being the idiots you are, it would mostly go over your head.
And Iron Dwarf, I sincerely hope you meant your first post as sarcasm, because if you did not, your ability to logically think about things is comparable to a tree stump. Here’s a little hint for you: disagreeing with Obama doesn’t mean someone voted for Bush; saying that we have to shut up because you felt slighted before is like saying that someone can’t complain about being raped because someone else has been raped before them.
God, you people make me so mad. Do the world a favor and fall off a cliff somewhere.
[quote]eremesu wrote:
We vote for our legislators. Anybody that trusts a corporation is an idiot. Goverment,the legislators and beauracracy , want to help. Yes I agree that is not always a good thing. We are all afraid of the bleak un private future. But the government is not more likely to cause that. Our elected legislators would not let that happen and we all damn well know that corporations would and already have. It is funny that the people against health care reform are the ones selling out our freedoms. Air security, unrestrained tsa searches, zero tolerance gulag schools, court mandated anger management classes, neo mcarthyist detention camps and their blatant suspension of suspected terrorists rights. Who is next? And you want to tell me how people getting medicine when previously the nurses dragged them to the curb and die will ‘start’ to lessen privacy. [/quote]
Wait, so at first you say “the government is good! we can trust them!”…
…and then you go on to whine about a ton of other things IMPOSED BY THE GOVERNMENT.
Did you also bitch about the Halliburton contracts?
You want to build the monster, but are completely oblivious as to what happens when that monster gets a taste for the politically well connected’s money.
[quote]eremesu wrote:
We vote for our legislators. Anybody that trusts a corporation is an idiot. Goverment,the legislators and beauracracy , want to help. Yes I agree that is not always a good thing. We are all afraid of the bleak un private future. But the government is not more likely to cause that. Our elected legislators would not let that happen and we all damn well know that corporations would and already have. It is funny that the people against health care reform are the ones selling out our freedoms. Air security, unrestrained tsa searches, zero tolerance gulag schools, court mandated anger management classes, neo mcarthyist detention camps and their blatant suspension of suspected terrorists rights. Who is next? And you want to tell me how people getting medicine when previously the nurses dragged them to the curb and die will ‘start’ to lessen privacy. [/quote]
[quote]Squiggles wrote:
I had an entire post written out, basically saying how much so many of you are idiots, but then I realized that, being the idiots you are, it would mostly go over your head.
And Iron Dwarf, I sincerely hope you meant your first post as sarcasm, because if you did not, your ability to logically think about things is comparable to a tree stump. Here’s a little hint for you: disagreeing with Obama doesn’t mean someone voted for Bush; saying that we have to shut up because you felt slighted before is like saying that someone can’t complain about being raped because someone else has been raped before them.
God, you people make me so mad. Do the world a favor and fall off a cliff somewhere.[/quote]
Senorita Squiggles, usted es mi heroina. Mucho amor.
[/quote]
Damn straight. You didn’t need a long ass post to get your point across there.
You had a great post too on the first page push. But this is just getting ridiculous. I’ve only used a tanning bed a few times, but I want my fucking right to use it without being taxed essentially without representation on the matter.
There should never be a law passed that tries to save people from themselves. The gov. should only interfere to make sure idiots (such as drunk drivers, etc.) don’t hurt anyone else. If people want to tan, smoke weed, eat meat, then let 'em be.
[quote]Cronus wrote:
There should never be a law passed that tries to save people from themselves. The gov. should only interfere to make sure idiots (such as drunk drivers, etc.) don’t hurt anyone else. If people want to tan, smoke weed, eat meat, then let 'em be. [/quote]
Great idea in theory… if everyman were a fucking island. Too bad we live in a SOCIETY, where the uninsured who get skin cancer from tanning, or lung cancer from smoking force everyone else to pay higher hospital costs to cover the difference. Solution: tax said dumbasses BEFORE the fact, and discourage idiotic behavior to begin with.