Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
so this looks bad *edited*, although I think i’d need lots of beer to really play the part.
Is there ever disputes as to who killed who? How do you determine who dies when?
chicks, booze, and swords…it looks like alot of fun.
i hate when this happens. It’s obvious it wasn’t intended to be racist, NAACP really need to think before tackling *edited* like this. Hallmark, racist. Really?
one time in 7th grade Science class, i was asked to read out loud a paragraph about volcanoes. I got to the word debris, pronounced it “Deh-BRIS”, and kept on reading. Everyone laughed. It took me a good 5 minutes to figure out why they were laughing, lol
Nickname, the last thing texas would do would be to follow in the footsteps of Nebraska. Texas has way to much money and pride to follow someone to a different conference. Regardless, Texas a&m is going to have a say in all this, being that the last game texas plays for the rest of eternity will always be versus the aggies. Don’t believe me? Come ask anyone in Texas.
There is a texas/texas a&m meeting going on with the higher ups happening today to discuss what exactly will happen. Some say texas a&m are in talks with the SEC, and if that happens who knows where texas will go. SEC sucking up Texas would be madness.
anyone know the name of the song they used for the trailer?
The map looks facking awesome. can’t wait to play
ya i don’t think we caused the bird to become extinct. i just thought it would have been cool to see in a zoo or in the wild rather than a museum. They just look hilarious.
And humans have driven populations down to near extinction for food in the past. The Long horned bison (cousin of the ones you see today) use to be around but them *edited* injins whiped them off the planet. I see what youre saying though, it seems highly improbable to extinct a species soley from the use as food.
The figures on japanese whale killings are a little higher tho, around 1000 a year. I’m not really *edited*ed about it that much, i’m actually one of the few that is more *edited*ed about elephants than whales. At least the majority of the whale is used up.
And i think a “Poching the Pochers” show would be bad *edited*. Would be tough though, pochers tend to be a little more unforgiving than japanese whaling companies. lol
MasterP said:
If Africans kill elephants for food, do liberals get upset? No.
If they’re doing it for food, same concept should apply to whales.
Because we don’t turn in cow carcases for “research” does that make the western world butchers? No. There is no medicinal or scientific value in the carcase of an animal.
wtf are you talking about. people are upset at elephants getting killed lol. If you didn’t know, the African elephant is on the endangered species list. So yeah people are *edited*ed about it. I don’t see the Japanese repopulating the whales they slaughter. But *edited* it, those whales are stupid so if we kill em all it’s their fault right?
While i don’t mind people killing animals for food, i do mind when it drives a species closer to extinction. We have driven whale populations in the past to near that. I just wish we could have saved certain species like the DoDo bird.
*edited* they would have been awesome to see be all goofy.
we don’t whale ranches. they aren’t like cows, nor sheep, the don’t breed as easily.
While i hate those tards on whale wars, their cause is justified. I’m all for studying whales and taking samples for the better of humanity, but there are ways of doing it without totally killing the whale.
and *edited* the japanese.
way off duendes. he’s no where near the size of chris farley.
he’s more like the dumb and dumber of drummers.
MasterP said:
That was a rhetorical question because the information I was asking for, IE his figures were in the legislation, wasn’t possible to locate because they weren’t actually in the bill. It’s not really fair to penalize Wiki for not publishing false information lol
i thought we eventually found the figures? or am i just retarded?
edit:
yeah see, the figures are right on page 730 a little more than half of the way down:
http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/patient-protection-affordable-care-act-as-passed.pdf
thx nickname!!
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/06/03/peru.murder.case/index.html?hpt=T1
think rich people don’t have it made? Check out Van der Sloot. Was the prime suspect in the Holloway disappearance in 05. Daddy has money and got him out of that mess. Donno if daddy is gonna be able to save this sick *edited* twice though. Peruvian woman found dead in a hotel room registered to Van der Sloot. This guy needs to fry.
why so serious?
here is my proof. My truth != Your truth. therefore Your truth = lies.
i was also under the impression
meant silly, quit being a such a serious sam.thats the thing bitey if you aren’t with them you are against them. That’s the conservative mentality. their way or the *edited*ing highway. the know it all party man.
MasterP said:
Well see here’s the problem. Obama has not once, but twice, increased the debt ceiling for the federal government. he took office, Obama instantly tripled the yearly deficit left by Bush and in his first 2 years will have spent 11% more than Bush did in his 8 years. Lowering the debt or creating a fair tax system isn’t going to happen under this guy so you can pretty much kiss goodbye any idealism you’re holding on to for at least another 2 years or until after the next revolution if Obamacare isn’t abolished.When
i chose bush because you brought up bush, obama, and spending genius. I was only responding. A.D.D. much?
and your lame response is “bush cut taxes too.”
again it’s not all about money masterp, what did we have to show for those 8 glorious years of tax cuts, war, and spending?
*edited* bush.
but back on topic:
*edited* rich people.
yeah that’s all nice masterp, but lets take a look at the context of what was spent.
Obama:
A $65 billion-a-year health plan
$15 billion in green energy spending
$85 billion in tax cuts and credits
A $25 billion-a-year increase in foreign aid
$18 billion a year in education spending
$3.5 billion for a national service plan
60 billion for 10 years for infrastructure
Bush:
150 billion dollar surplus disappears
750+ billion dollar war on iraq (for?)
it’s called substance. at least we have something to show for the spending other than death and destruction.
149,965 is the average?? hell that’s a nice wad of cash money right there.
you sure you don’t mean 14,965 dollars?
also rockafeller was the richest man alive. oprah is rich, but there are a lot more richer.
Bill Gates is a great example though of an uber rich man with pretty good virtues. He’s a donating beast.
i don’t consider our heated discussions flame wars. Me and masterp very rarely ever condescend one another directly, now we may poke fun at each other’s opposing view points, but that’s just the name of the game. I actually look forward to what masterp, and whoever else has to say, because different perspectives are very refreshing in my mind, regardless if i agree or not.
that said, i’m prepared for all out war!!!!!! bring it conservatives, i have joints rolled up and ready to shoot at you
dude don’t you know the rich are not only economically more superior than all of us, but they are also smarter, wiser, prettier, better genes, more fit, overall a higher human being. Rich people need all that money because they earned it (lol) and most were bestowed by God to be uber rich. We should look to them for advice, and in fact pay them more money for their good graces. Hell, since they are so successful they have to know what is right for our country. And we all know the trickle down theory works wonders
/sarcasm
10 bucks masterP’s response will be something like: “the rich already get taxed more than any other class you commies/socialists!!”
Nickname said:
god you all both suck, i found the text within 10 seconds of going to google.
http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/patient-protection-affordable-care-act-as-passed.pdf
Quote:
SEC. 9002. INCLUSION OF COST OF EMPLOYER-SPONSORED HEALTH
COVERAGE ON W–2.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 6051(a) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 (relating to receipts for employees) is amended by striking
‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (12), by striking the period at the
end of paragraph (13) and inserting ‘‘, and’’, and by adding after
paragraph (13) the following new paragraph:
‘‘(14) the aggregate cost (determined under rules similar
to the rules of section 4980B(f)(4)) of applicable employer-sponsored
coverage (as defined in section 4980I(d)(1)), except that
this paragraph shall not apply to—
‘‘(A) coverage to which paragraphs (11) and (12) apply,
or
‘‘(
the amount of any salary reduction contributionsto a flexible spending arrangement (within the meaning
of section 125).’’.
(
EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this sectionshall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2010.
NuRayz, you were looking at the previous section, which is about the additional tax, this thread was originally about adding the amount of your coverage onto the W2, which will in turn increase your taxes amount.
ah. no wonder. the 40% increase only applies to employer contributions (combined with how much you pay) of 8500 dollars (individuals) or 23,000 (families) and up. So if you and your company pay 11,000 for a premium health care plan, you should expect a 1,000 increase annually.
But whats the percentage if you fall under the excise amount? I’m still inclined to believe you won’t get taxed, but maybe i’m reading it wrong.
MasterP said:
MasterP said:
I’m going to stick with the “I’m right until you prove me wrong with actual references and page numbers” routine.
god i hate you. lol
http://dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill53.pdf
PAGE 58 sec. 9001
Quote:
Sec. 9001. Excise tax on high cost employer-sponsored health coverage. Levies an excise tax of 40 percent on insurance companies and plan administrators for any health coverage plan that is above the threshold of $8,500 for single coverage and $23,000 for family coverage. The tax would apply to self-insured plans and plans sold in the group market, but not to plans sold in the individual market (except for coverage eligible for the deduction for self-employed individuals). The tax would apply to the amount of the premium in excess of the threshold. The threshold would be indexed at CPI-U plus one percentage point, and a transition rule would increase the threshold for the 17 highest cost States for the first 3 years. An additional threshold amount of $1,350 for singles and $3,000 for families is available for retired individuals age 55 and older and for plans that cover employees engaged in high risk professions. Section 10901 adds individuals who perform longshore work to the list of high-risk employees qualifying for the higher thresholds for imposing the excise tax. Clarifies that plans providing certain excepted benefits under IRC Section 9832© are not subject to the excise tax.MasterP said:
MasterP said:
I’m going to stick with the “I’m right until you prove me wrong with actual references and page numbers” routine.
god i hate you. lol
http://dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill53.pdf
PAGE 58 sec. 9001
Quote:
Sec. 9001. Excise tax on high cost employer-sponsored health coverage. Levies an excise tax of 40 percent on insurance companies and plan administrators for any health coverage plan that is above the threshold of $8,500 for single coverage and $23,000 for family coverage. The tax would apply to self-insured plans and plans sold in the group market, but not to plans sold in the individual market (except for coverage eligible for the deduction for self-employed individuals). The tax would apply to the amount of the premium in excess of the threshold. The threshold would be indexed at CPI-U plus one percentage point, and a transition rule would increase the threshold for the 17 highest cost States for the first 3 years. An additional threshold amount of $1,350 for singles and $3,000 for families is available for retired individuals age 55 and older and for plans that cover employees engaged in high risk professions. Section 10901 adds individuals who perform longshore work to the list of high-risk employees qualifying for the higher thresholds for imposing the excise tax. Clarifies that plans providing certain excepted benefits under IRC Section 9832© are not subject to the excise tax.