[ExI] Warren Buffett is worried too and thinks Republicans are "asinine"

[Kelly Anderson]

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:38 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:
> extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *Kelly Anderson
>
>
>
> >…The constitution only protects the privacy of US citizens, and possibly
> visitors to the USA…
>
>
>
> Ah EXCELLENT!  Finally someone who has found where in the constitution it
> says anything about US citizens having the inalienable right to privacy.  I
> have been searching for that since I don’t know how long.  Kelly, where did
> you find that?
>

Ammendment 4 Search and Seizure
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,
and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized.


> >…Ms. Merkel is a foreign national who is not protected by the
> constitution…
>
>
>
> I agree.  Now where in the constitution does it say anything about privacy?
>

4th Ammendment


>
> My heartburn with it is not that it is illegal but rather that it would
> piss off the one who should be our strongest ally.
>

Thus the need to NOT GET CAUGHT. Just as the Germans have not YET been
caught spying on us. Now with wikileaks out there, the Germans may have
smartened up and STOPPED spying on us, but I can assure you that they have
in the past, even without specific proof of the same. We KNOW the Chinese
spy on us all the time, and the Russians. Why not the Germans? And the
Mormons!


> One day soon we will wake up and discover that China, Japan and Germany
> are the only three countries in the world capable of loaning money in the
> kinds of absurd quantities we USians demand of other countries, and I am
> not so sure about Japan.
>

Japan is off the table for the moment. They went through their little 20
year deflationary period. Very painful that.


> >…Which is why they shouldn't have gotten caught. Don't we have the
> obligation to make sure our "friends" are really our friends, even behind
> closed doors?
>
>
>
> They aren’t really friends Kelly.  There are no friends.  Only potential
> bankers.
>

We would never know if we didn't spy on them.


>
>
> We see the current bunch are saying the Tea Party patriots are terrorists
> and coming very close to identifying them as national enemies.  OK then
> what happens if they get a bunch of seats in congress next fall, more than
> they already have?
>
> >…History is not with them on gaining seats during the second term of a
> lame duck president…
>
>
>
> The midterms a year from today will be a referendum on ObamaCare.  One
> year from now, very little else will matter.  If this thing crashes as hard
> as I think it will, the Democrat party will lose a bunch of seats, the
> Republicans will break even or lose a few and the Tea Party will be a force
> to be with reckoned.  If O-care succeeds, just the opposite.  Nothing else
> will matter much.
>

I tend to agree with you. Obama's approval rating just dipped into the 30s
for the first time, btw. I'm sure that has nothing to do with
healthcare.gov... oh no no...


>
>
> >…But Obamacare failing is exactly what will lead to a single payer
> system. It's too big to fail, remember?
>
>
>
> That isn’t clear to me.  It sure appears to be set up for failure, but it
> isn’t at all clear the next step is single payer.  I would go for that if
> done at a state level, or if we get a national balanced budget amendment to
> go with it.  Or we destroy our credit rating, so no sane party will loan us
> money.
>

If we lose our liquidity, we are indeed screwed. Even with a Libertarian
president, and both houses of congress, we would be screwed if we lost our
liquidity. It took us a 100 years to get into this mess, and we can't get
out of it over night.


>
> >…They can't help but fail. It is the government we're talking about.
> They never really succeed at anything really important. Yes, they
> occasionally build a bridge to somewhere. Yes, they did defend us against
> Hitler. But generally speaking if you want something screwed up badly
> enough you give it to the government and you are assured it will be…
>
>
>
> Agreed, so why do you think this current misadventure is a step toward
> single payer?
>

Because they have made sure we can't go back to what we had before. The
only way forward, the only way to fix the problem is to make a bigger
problem. That's the way the government usually operates, isn't it?


>  >…I would love to see the youth of America revolt against this. It is
> them who are getting the biggest shaft from O-care. Paying for insurance
> that THEY DON'T NEED. It is redistribution of health. Only it is from the
> poorest youth of America who can't get a job coming out of college, to the
> richest, the older folk in America, who are the most well off demographic.
> I thought socialism was supposed to help the poor…
>
> Don’t worry Kelly, the young will revolt bigtime.  It will be like the old
> burn the draft card days, but this one may have some damn serious
> consequences.  That business about setting the IRS to where they can demand
> payment but not place any criminal sanctions for non-payment nor issue
> liens against property or bank accounts for non-payment will hurt us.  It
> will send a message to a generation that they do not need to pay their
> taxes.  The whole scheme dilutes the power of the IRS, which could have
> catastrophic consequences.
>

The young put Obama into office. They get what they deserve for not paying
attention.


>
>
> >…Obama lied, grandma died…
>
>
>
> Oooh that’s cold.  {8^D
>

Well, they are the ones that made the commercial wheeling grandma over the
cliff in a wheelchair. They deserve what they have coming. And I tell you,
it is coming.

Mike Lee got an 8 minute long standing ovation here in Utah Saturday. I
don't think he's going anywhere soon, despite an attempt to change the
system in Utah from a caucus to something that will favor establishment
Republicans more. With the words "Mike Lee" coming off of the lips of Rush
Limbaugh and Sean Hannity ten times a day as the example of what little is
being done right in Washington today, I assure you that he will not lose
his seat. So long as he doesn't make child porn, denounce Islam or
something incredibly stupid.



>
> My favorite I have thought of so far:
>
>
>
> Tune In, Turn On, Opt Out
>
>
>
> >…LOL. That will work for a few years, until the penalties are so large
> that you have to pay attention to them…
>
>
>
> No sir.  Even if you pay attention to them, the IRS still has no means of
> collecting the opt-out fees.  I notice a lot of the articles on the topic
> say things like “The ACA didn’t include any provisions for the IRS to
> enforce collection of the penalties.”  This kinda misses the point by
> understatement: the ACA clearly specifically forbids the IRS from enforcing
> the penalties.  They are free to DEMAND payment, they can even send a
> bill.  They just can’t do anything if the taxpayer just says no.
>

Most people overpay their taxes anyway, so the IRS will just give them a
smaller refund. Not really a problem, is it? They aren't giving the money
back once they have it and have the right under the law to keep it.


>  Next, note that the ACA is designed to be difficult or impossible to
> modify without nullifying the whole thing.  That is why they specifically
> removed the isolation clauses.  They didn’t forget them, they carefully
> extracted them, so the insurance companies wouldn’t be left holding the bag.
>

Oh, you can be sure that the insurance companies will be blamed when the
time comes. It's part of the progression towards single payer. The
Democrats demonize whoever they need to in order to stay in power, and the
insurance companies are part of the "usual suspects" according to the left.
If I were the president of an insurance company these days, I'd be looking
for a new job. The proles will stay on as government employees.


>
> The section which explicitly forbids the IRS from collecting the opt-out
> tax is cross linked to the section on the insurance companies requirement
> to sell to any zombie who staggers thru the door.  If they kill the
> prohibition for the IRS to collect, they kill the requirement for the
> insurance company to sell to zombies.  If those two things go out, the only
> thing that is left of O-care is a pile of wood pulp, granted a tall one.
> That linking of those two things was intentional and carefully designed by
> those who wrote this bill behind closed doors in Senate private chambers,
> with one party and a collection of insurance company reps with plenty of
> campaign donations to hand out freely.  Kelly, is this all making sense now?
>
>

Woah, woah, woah, you think that Obamacare was written behind Senate doors?
What are you smoking Spike?

Max Baucus was the senator that put forth the monstrosity, but he never
read it.
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/max-baucus-author-of-obamacare-admits-he-never-read-his-own-bill/Content?oid=2161708
I would not that the San Francisco Examiner is hardly a right wing paper.

“I don’t think you want me to waste my time to read every page of the
health care bill. You know why? It’s statutory language,” Baucus said. “We
hire experts.”

Oh, another goodie hidden in Obamacare. I hadn't heard about this one...

"I’m awaiting a further statement from Baucus’ staff as to whether or not
the senator was aware of a provision of the health care law (unpopular even
among liberals<http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/5/6/864097/-Health-Care-Bill-Section-9006-and-Your-Small-Business>)
which mandates that businesses send out 1099 tax forms to any individual or
corporation from which they purchase goods or services worth more than
$600."

Obamacare was partially written by the Center for American Progress. See
this admission on Bill Mayer's show by the President of the CfAP.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/06/02/center_for_american_progress_president_shares_part_in_obamacare_i_helped_write_the_bill.html

I've heard they wrote a LOT of the actual text that made it into the bill.
Now, if you don't know who the Center for American Progress is, then I
encourage you to look into it, as they are behind a LOT of the shenanigans
of late.


>
>
>
> >…I have already failed at selling T-Shirts, remember Caucasians for Mitt
> Romney?
>
>
>
> {8^D
>
>
>
> >…Of course, I haven't learned my lesson, I'm now working on a T-Shirt
> deal for http://www.itanimulli.com (Note that is illuminati.com spelled
> backwards. You should see what happens when you type that into a web browser
> …
>
>
>
> Haaaaahahahahahhaaaaa!  Excellent gag, me lad.  The New World Order crowd
> just keeps falling for the same gag, over and over and over.  It seems they
> just cannot learn.  They were falling for that back when I was in high
> school, they still are.  That crowd doesn’t seem to get it: the New World
> Order isn’t some big secret evil conspiracy; that isn’t necessary.  We
> create the New World Order by borrowing two million dollars per second with
> no credible means of repaying it, then identify as enemies of the state
> anyone who points out that this madness is madness.
>

Yup. Exactly. But maybe I'll sell a T-shirt or two this time. We'll see.


>
> I've always liked:
>
> You can keep the Change, but I want my Hope back.
>
>
>
> -Kelly
>
>
>
> We will not be keeping the change.
>

We will keep Obamacare, sadly. And that is the change we were promised.
There will be no free pocket change. Period.


> We already saw the 1 November fix date blow by, the HealthCare.gov site
> isn’t fixed.
>

Duh. Software is hard, even when done right. And this mess wasn't even
close to done right. It is the software architecture from hell, driven by a
bureaucracy that is constantly changing the rules. I wouldn't sign up to
program on this beasty for all the pop tarts in Nicaragua.


> We are already seeing what looks to me like pre-emptive apologies for not
> making the 1 December date with a report I heard just today: the site never
> even attempted to encrypt any of the information they were collecting.
> Didn’t even try!
>

Lord. And that is one of the easiest parts. Just do the https thing, no big
deal. Of course that doesn't matter if they just mail your paperwork to
someone else in another state. Duh.

  I know it takes more than four weeks to tack on after the fact some kind
> of encryption that could scale to millions of applicants, considering how
> complicated that site is and how many leaky contractors are involved.
>

You could not easily encrypt all of the web services, but you could the
main web site fairly easily.


> That whole task should never have involved the Fed, it should have been
> done by the insurance companies.  They would each have smaller, more
> manageable systems in place and would have incentive to keep their own
> customer’s data private.
>

Yeah, well insurance companies aren't exactly known for their stellar
software either. Else how could Dentrix charge a dollar per insurance form
submitted just to make sure that the insurance company wouldn't reject it.
The insurance company should have been able to do that. (Not that Dentrix
is exactly the high tech leader, having worked there. They just slog away
until it mostly works.)


>
> But back to the most interesting claim you made right at first Kelly:
> where did you find in the constitution anything about US citizens being
> entitled to privacy?  I know the legal system has laws and that “reasonable
> expectation of privacy” phrase that determines the legality of snooping,
> but where is it in the constitution?
>
>
>
4th Amendment. And other places. If you really want to know more about it,
try here:

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/rightofprivacy.html

-Kelly
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20131106/92708823/attachment.html>