swiss_army_chainsaw posted:

Soonmot posted:

I had shared some meme about Sweden requiring employers give paternity leave to fathers and a friend, who is normally kind, generous and compassionate, yet is still a raging libertarian responds with "maybe this is why Sweden has 25% unemployment for workers in their 20's."

Now, I'm not rising to the bait, but that's a strawman, right? What the hell does that have to do with employment?

swiss_army_chainsaw posted:

"Never really had the impression that MLK was a man of true peace and vision, regardless of his lofty rhetoric. His posture and approach always seemed laced with a lot of arrogance and defiance, which pretty much set the tone for the next 40+ years."

vyelkin posted:

If all they care about is anecdotes, show them this website:

http://www.pluralofanecdote.com/

It's an incredible tool that's completely useless for statistical purposes but which will lineup a 'private plan/uninsured' anecdote next to a 'public option' anecdote and let you read them both.

swiss_army_chainsaw posted:

"Never really had the impression that MLK was a man of true peace and vision, regardless of his lofty rhetoric. His posture and approach always seemed laced with a lot of arrogance and defiance, which pretty much set the tone for the next 40+ years."

quote:

In a final regulation issued Wednesday, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) assumed that under Obamacare the cheapest health insurance plan available in 2016 for a family will cost $20,000 for the year.

Under Obamacare, Americans will be required to buy health insurance or pay a penalty to the IRS.

The IRS's assumption that the cheapest plan for a family will cost $20,000 per year is found in examples the IRS gives to help people understand how to calculate the penalty they will need to pay the government if they do not buy a mandated health plan.

The examples point to families of four and families of five, both of which the IRS expects in its assumptions to pay a minimum of $20,000 per year for a bronze plan.

“The annual national average bronze plan premium for a family of 5 (2 adults, 3 children) is $20,000,” the regulation says.

Twiin posted:

I normally don't get people sending me these kinds of things but this has been making the rounds:


With a link to: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/irs-cheapest-obamacare-plan-will-be-20000-family

I like how they're taking the IRS saying what the average is and then saying that's what the cheapest will be.

swiss_army_chainsaw posted:

From a cousin's Facebook wall. It originated from a page called "Right Wing Rants & Raves." Well, at least they're being honest. Many of the comments on the pic denigrate MLK, too (big surprise). For example:

"Never really had the impression that MLK was a man of true peace and vision, regardless of his lofty rhetoric. His posture and approach always seemed laced with a lot of arrogance and defiance, which pretty much set the tone for the next 40+ years."

Wow, what a fancy way of saying "Negros be gettin' uppity."

Twiin posted:

I normally don't get people sending me these kinds of things but this has been making the rounds:


With a link to: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/irs-cheapest-obamacare-plan-will-be-20000-family

I like how they're taking the IRS saying what the average is and then saying that's what the cheapest will be.

Sarion posted:

It's not even that. As far as I can tell it's a purely fabricated number for the purposes of showing how the law calculates penalties. It's saying, "if the average bronze plan is $20,000; and the family make up is ABC, and their income is XYZ, then the penalty would be calculated like so..."

Sarion posted:

It's not even that. As far as I can tell it's a purely fabricated number for the purposes of showing how the law calculates penalties. It's saying, "if the average bronze plan is $20,000; and the family make up is ABC, and their income is XYZ, then the penalty would be calculated like so..."

IRS posted:

An individual is an exempt individual... in a month if the individual’s required contribution (determined on an annual basis) for minimum essential coverage for the month exceeds the required contribution percentage... the required contribution percentage is 8 percent [of annual income].

Twiin posted:

So I debunked this one myself. There are clear Max Annual Out-of-Pocket Premium caps in PPACA.

quote:

I did watch the testimony. It was utterly disappointing how she reacted and was unwilling to answer the questions. Why did the administration tell the guys on the ground to stand down? Why did they not fund it as needed? Why did they continue with the lie for 2 weeks? Why is the guy still in prison when he was not the catalysis to this tragedy?

quote:

The guy who made that racist YouTube video is in prison because he violated the terms of his parole. The administration might have lied, but it's most likely they just didn't know what was going on. And Benghazi had some local police providing security, but consulates (as I understand it) aren't nearly as well secured as embassies. Benghazi was a sad tragedy, but it's mostly just a conspiracy astroturfed by Rush Limbaugh et al

Kro-Bar posted:

I'm dealing with a guy on Facebook who is complaining about Sec. Clinton's "damning" statements in her testimony about Benghazi. I replied saying it was disappointing that people haven't seemed to have watched her testimony in full. He said:


I said:


Do any of you brilliant fellows and ladies have any better sources I could read up on to actually refute this guy a little more succinctly?

Dr Christmas posted:

One of the big problems about funding was it couldn't get through Congress. I'm not sure if we want to go straight to blaming Republicans, or doing "No, you" stuff.

Kro-Bar posted:

Yeah, I recall hearing something about funding for consulates failing in Congress, but even if I could find a source on it I know going a partisan route isn't going to get me anywhere. I want to try to point out how silly it is to focus on one--sad and tragic, yes--failure of our foreign policy amidst the myriad of more major issues.

Tab8715 posted:

Here's a good one, I've got a huge Ron Paul fanatic and there's is where we ended up...

*snip*

I thought I did pretty well. Carl's mention of Steve is basically him exclaiming that I'm not actually making writing this up. In the past, I did not care and just copied poo poo but hey gently caress facts right?

vyelkin posted:

Smack down his '40 years' bullshit talking point by explaining how the years of prosperity he's talking about just so happened to coincide with the highest marginal tax rates in US history, and that the most recent 40 years he's talking about where America supposedly is going down the tubes happens to be the 40 years with the largest trend of tax decreases and cuts in social spending. Then point out that 96% of Americans have received some form of government benefit, though they often don't realize it because many things government does go completely unnoticed and/or taken for granted.

Then show him this video and tell him to go eat a dick. America is (to a certain extent) and should be a social welfare state and he should love it or leave it for Somalia, libertarian paradise.

Tab8715 posted:

Here's a good one, I've got a huge Ron Paul fanatic and there's is where we ended up...



Full-size

I thought I did pretty well. Carl's mention of Steve is basically him exclaiming that I'm not actually making writing this up. In the past, I did not care and just copied poo poo but hey gently caress facts right?

WampaLord posted:

I love how the idiots in all of these Facebook arguments can never put the effort of even spelling/capitalizing their comments correctly. Of course, if you call them on this, they usually just respond with "It's the Internet, who cares how I spell?"

Job Truniht posted:

Libertarians like to constantly portray themselves as mature rational adults who argue with children because they are anything but. You're not going to get much out of this.

Leospeare posted:

The only response to that is, "Hey, guess what, it's not 1996 and the internet isn't a toy anymore. Type like a literate person."

Jiimy posted:

How have they infected my poor mother with this rhetoric?

Jiimy posted:

This is only notable because this is a woman who, to my knowledge, has never owned a gun and literally calls the cops when people's lawns aren't mowed regularly enough for her liking, and is a self described socialist. How have they infected my poor mother with this rhetoric?

Jiimy posted:

This is only notable because this is a woman who, to my knowledge, has never owned a gun and literally calls the cops when people's lawns aren't mowed regularly enough for her liking, and is a self described socialist. How have they infected my poor mother with this rhetoric?

quote:

I read an editorial in the Tennessean where a man believes in Obama's tyrannical gun ban scheme.
He believes the Constitution and Bill of Rights are limited, negotiable and can be restrained by government.
Clearly this person does not grasp the concept of a constitution. Neither the Constitution nor The Bill of Rights can be legally restrained by the government they define and charter.
Those documents are the governing blue prints for our rulers.
It over rides any and all individual officials, parties, PACs, lobbiests and other vehicles for governing the American people.
Then he states he is a Jew and implies they know better than anyone else because of their history of oppression.
Clearly he misses the boat. They were oppressed because they strayed away from God.
God forgives them but the course they follow is their own and often the wrong course.
God punishes us as a loving parent punishes their disobedient children, not out of spite or hate but a love that wants what is best for us.
I believe that is possibly what the verse that says "The first shall be last and the last shall be first" refers too.
They are the world's first people to God, just as the President's family is the nation's first family.
Their history has no bearing on our "gun control" issue. Much of our political difficulties now stem from lawyers, corporations and some wealthy who believe as he that the terms of the Constitution and Bill of Rights should be negotiable.
They are NOT! It is time to force our leaders to recognize their charter and uphold it AS WRITTEN and not based on what is convenient to them.
It is time to force the courts to stop referencing European law when deciding cases here. Europe has been ruled by some of the most oppressive governments in human history. European law has no bearing here.
Only laws created here by Americans have precedent here. I also believe that while the Constitution permits the President and Congress to sign international treaties it does NOT allow the signing of treaties that allow foreign governments to over rule American law.
Things like the Law of the Sea Treaty, The International Criminal Court, The UN Arms Trade Treaty and all other such instruments are null and void under the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The UN is NOT a recognized branch of American government and has no authority here.
By the same token US military personnel should NEVER be placed under UN leadership.
They are forced to swear allegiance to the UN and strip the American flag from their uniforms and replace it with the UN flag.
Army Specialist Michale New is being courts martialed because he refused to to remove the American flag and replace it with the UN flag and swear allegiance to the UN. This is wrong!