Federal Government officially OWNS us now....

[deltadukman]

Umrebs.....valid question....were you glad that the rebel flags and mascot taken away from Ole Miss and the name changed?

[Ster]

Some poor kid or struggling single parent I don't mind it's all the able bodied non-swimmers and the single mothers with 10 kids running around confused on father’s day that bother me. Not to mention a small business with 40 or so employees that want be able to grow unless they have opportunity to double or triple in size, growing from 40 to 51 employees means less profit due to health care cost.

I just read an article about businesses in... France? (I can't recall for sure but I think it's France) that all have 1 employee less than the cap. If the owner wants to expand, he starts a completely new business. Seems there are thousands of companies with X-1 employees and lots of businessmen who own multiple companies. More government regulations lead to more loopholes for people to abuse. I can't say that I blame them.

I wouldn't want to be an employee of a company that has 55 workers right now.

[Rowdy53103]

it is simple mathmatics

Only half of americans pay income taxes.

the other half use our tax money to live, the government issues it to them in various forms. If a person can not afford health insurance, the government will provide them with it. its just more tax payers money that will be given to the people, we are already a bizzillion dollars in debt - how will America Afford this?? its simple - USA cannot afford it - we are broke


The non Tax payers will continue to vote for liberal blood suckers that are robbing the US treasuery and giving it back to the people who piss it in the wind.

and most of us will work for the rest of our life to pay for it.

The thing that scares me is how fast they producing kids and multiplying....like rabbits. They will soon be the voting majority and I am afraid this November might show us that they already are....

[MSDawg870]

June 28, 2012 The day umrebs came out of the closet on ducksouth as a complete blankety blank moron.

[Plainsman04]

From the Heritage Foundation: http://youtu.be/8bqTZDwdAKw

[Rice]

Umreb you may be the biggest faggot I have ever met. A complete idiot? Do you even duck hunt? Or are you just a member of ducks unlimited? You obviously are pretty sheltered...and also obviously have never had to work for $#!+ in your life. Because if you have ever had to work for one damn thing in your life just to watch some $#!+ play the system and get to ride for free while you bust your ass you would understand. But when you're a little punkass that has been given everything and not had to understand what it is like to bust your ass I wouldn't expect you to understand. You really are in the wrong place saying the things you have because for the most part the people on this site are hard working people who bust their ass to give their family the things they need. It isn't enjoyable to tell your family you can't make it to a baseball game or can't go fishing with your dad because you have to work. Just to get taxed about 1/4 of your check so some lazy peice can sit at home and get to go enjoy those things with his family. Most people sacrifice a lot to provide for their family on here and for somebody else to not have to sacrifice anything and live off of the system and not have to work is frustrating. But once again like I said I wouldn't expect somebody that hasn't worked for one thing to understand that.

[quackhead11]

The ruling by the Supreme Court today, gives very broad power to the Federal Government under this courts interpretation of the Commerce Clause.

You may want to read the opinion. Justice Roberts wrote that there is no basis for the individual mandate under the commerce clause but rather the authority is derived from the powers of taxation as enumerated in the Constitution. The Court was presented with two issues: whether the individual mandate was constitutional and whether the Medicaid expansion provision was constitutional.

Justice Roberts wrote the following in the opinions preface with regard to the Court's role in determining the constitutionality of the case.
"Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices."

Exactly - the individual mandate was not decided on the powers of the Commerce Clause, as some suggested. Justice Roberts clearly rejected that argument, which in my opinion, would have given the Federal Government limitless powers going forward to regulate or mandate anything. Unfortunately, the Federal Government claimed in the alternative, that the individual mandate arose from the Federal Government's powers of taxation - which are very broad powers. Essentially, the Federal Government claimed that any eligible person that did not have health insurance coverage, would be imposed with a "penalty" or "tax" by the Federal Government. Reading the opinion, Justice Roberts and the majority did not have much to work with on striking down the individual mandate as unconstitutional. The last 3 sentences quoted above, however, shows their frustration and how the people should handle this.

[deltadukman]

I've also heard this tossed around from some lawyer speak:

the congress alternatively proposed it as a tax, and case law mandates that the court exhaust all reasonable alternative interpretations before striking down legislation as unconstitutional.

Which basically grants the court loopholes to do what they want

[camlock]

The obvious obstacles of a logical/sensible person being an Ole Miss fan and the obvious association are on full display in this thread!

[Smoke68]

Could it be that Justice Roberts was tired of Kennedy getting all the press coverage and deciding every split decision handed down by the SC? He wanted his turn in the limelight and for everyone to stop assuming they knew how he would vote?

[SNOT]

Some poor kid or struggling single parent I don't mind it's all the able bodied non-swimmers and the single mothers with 10 kids running around confused on father’s day that bother me. Not to mention a small business with 40 or so employees that want be able to grow unless they have opportunity to double or triple in size, growing from 40 to 51 employees means less profit due to health care cost.

I just read an article about businesses in... France? (I can't recall for sure but I think it's France) that all have 1 employee less than the cap. If the owner wants to expand, he starts a completely new business. Seems there are thousands of companies with X-1 employees and lots of businessmen who own multiple companies. More government regulations lead to more loopholes for people to abuse. I can't say that I blame them.

I wouldn't want to be an employee of a company that has 55 workers right now.

I'd imagine a lot of construction companies with 50 or more in house employees will start laying off their in house crews and start using subs more to keep it under 50.

[DEERHUNT]

So, who thinks the unemployeement is going up. I'm sure there are alot of 50-100 employee company's that will can't bare the cost of health care.

[deltadukman]

The obvious obstacles of a logical/sensible person being an Ole Miss fan and the obvious association are on full display in this thread!

Or it could be that if he is upset about the denouncing of Col Reb and the Rebel persona, yet he presents a liberal viewpoint on this site, we might be dealing with conflicting viewpoint. Not doing what you think I'm doing, trying to prove a point. Maybe I should have asked "Did you vote for changing the face of Ole Miss, or are you mad at the liberal who changed it?"

[4dawgma]

non-swimmer:
Describing someone of African descent. A word that Whites can covertly use to refer to Blacks while Blacks are present. People of color usually lack the ability to swim

[SNOT]

Where do yall think we are in this cycle?



States In This Cycle?
What is the What is the Tytler Cycle ?

Alexander Tytler, a Scottish historian who lived at the same time as the American Founding Fathers, who described a repeating cycle in history. He had found that societies went through this same cycle again and again, and that the cycle lasted roughly 200 years each time. Tytler said the cycle starts out with a society in bondage. Then it goes in this sequence:

Bondage
Spiritual Faith
Courage
Liberty
Abundance
Selfishness
Complacency
Apathy
Dependence
Then starting over with Bondage

Tytler organized these items in a circle:

















So to give a little more on the sequence above, a society starts out in bondage, meaning no or very limited freedoms. Now faced with a very difficult situation (bondage), they turn to religion and religious faith. Through this they achieve the courage they need to fight for and win their freedom. Next, through the benefits of freedom, they achieve an abundance in material things.

Now we start into the other side of the circle/cycle. We get selfishness and laziness setting in. Then we get apathy and finally dependence. Then we arrive back up at the top with bondage again.
Most of Tytler's work has been completely lost. I found this cycle to be very interesting in relation to where we are in the United States today. Everyone has said we are somewhere on the left side of the circle. I think we are somewhere between Apathy and Dependence. Any opinions on this? Comments?

Posted by Corey of Project Liberty