Trouble with jalapenos...somewhere along the line someone thought it a good idea to breed the heat right out of them. So, when you go to the grocery store, you have no idea what heat level the damned things are.
They've not done that to serranos as far as I know, and they seem to have a nice 'crisp' taste to them. I put them in pretty much ALL of my salsas.
I've had good luck lately with raw diced serranos, mixed with roasted peeled and chopped poblano chiles in my green salsas of late.
"In a hilarious twist, most of the people who are saying that it's oppression and taking away our rights were also fully supportive of the Patriot Act."
Nope..need to ditch those too!!
Hmm...why haven't the Dem's taken it upon themselves to at LEAST let the parts of the Patriot Act due to sunset...go away?
Why did they very recently vote to keep all of it still working against us?
"This is only an issue because tantrums thrown by Republicans and Teabaggers made a simple single-payer system politically impossible. This despite the fact that it is successfully used in many countries, including retirees and veterans in the USA. (Blah blah, "Medicare is broke!" That's because people live longer. Just raise the retirement age and the problem is solved.)"
Basically, I don't think anyone but hard core far left liberals wanted the govt to run everything with a single payer system.
But don't worry..what we got is still a step in that direction. Obama and crew and their advisers (especially the advisers) have been on record in the past saying they'd not get it at once, that it would be a gradual takeover.
But really...moderate Dems, Reps, Tea Bag types, Independents, Libertarians...pretty much the majority of the US didn't want all this or worse as you described.
Hell, the numbers game that congress/president played to try to make it look 'feasible' to the CBO were amazing. They all know this isn't gonna even come close to costing what they said, nor will there be enough (if any) savings coming to Medicare (they haven't been able to run it right in the past)...but don't worry.
I've already heard rumblings of a federal VAT tax coming in on top of all of this. That's about the ONLY way they're going to be able to raise this kind of money to keep us from going into the debt hole and never getting out.
"It does effect you. When people without health care go to the emergency room, you end up paying with higher health insurance premiums. These higher premiums lead to even more people being unable to afford health care. It's a cycle that had to be stopped."
And now what is the trade off we have?
Well, it looks like we ALL will now have even more increased health coverage costs, both directly and indirectly. If you already have insurance through a company that is even halfway decent...you'll have to pay more for it. Indirectly? Just hearing on the news today that restaurants in the SF area are moving to adding a food service surcharge to all meals or items sold...so as to offset the cost by now having to offer freakin' health insurance to waiters/staff. Yep, so eating food out is gonna get more $$$.
Taxing people's insurance now that had good/decent coverage..etc. And most all of this right on top of the middle class income EARNERS.
It also means, the govt is gonna start taxing more on your retirement investments (dividends, etc)...so, you're gonna have even more trouble saving for retirement.
Frankly, I'm thinking this is an even more expensive tradeoff than you mentioned that we originally had.
"Sigh. And certain groups are screaming that this new health care plan is 'oppression' and taking away from all of our rights."
And in a way...it is. Just another step on that slippery slope. You mean you won't mind the IRS checking monthly to see if you have proper health insurance purchased?
"You owe the fact that "success" amounts to more than a belly full of berries and moss for a bed to the society and the thousands of generations before you who figured out how to make hard work count."
Yet they made it all the way to these generations, for most of the time, without having to have the government take money out of everyone's pocket to spend on the poor, the lazy, the incompetent, the criminal...etc. I don't have a problem with helping the poor, or the truly infirmed or elderly, but I'd prefer to do it like in the old days through voluntarily giving through charity.
Our social saftey net has become a way of life for too many these days...I prefer to go with something Ben Franklin is attributed: roughly, that we should make it as uncomfortable as possible to be poor...so as to encourage people to work hard to NOT be poor.
"You don't come out and say so, but it seems to me you'er implying that making kids have sex -later- is for some reason a good thing. And I wouldn't know why. Indeed, a healthy sex life is one of the most wonderful things in life, and that is true for teenagers as much as for older folks, indeed I'd even say that my sex-life was *more* important to me when I was 17 than it is today at double the age."
I've said it before on these types of topics and I'll say it again. While you are young...go FUCK as often as you can, and with as many people as you can!! Especially for a male, these are you fuck years. You are at the height of you stamina and libido. Enjoy it while you can. Enjoy sleeping with teenage chicks while you can...you only get a few years, so enjoy it while you can. (Depending on the consent laws in your particular state).
But do it...'cause as you get older, you do slow down, it is just a fact of life. Later, you'll likely settle down, marry, have kids...it moves to a different plane...but if you get it out of your system, you won't regret getting enough of the wild stuff when young and maybe try act out on that in middle life.
Sure, be careful, use protection (you have to these days I guess)....but fuck all you can while you are at your prime and enjoy it!!
"It's a daft idea called chastity that's being kept alive and well by feminists. It all starts with the old, "I think that sex is a bit different for woman. They like it to be more romantic." Acknowledge that men and women do it the same amount, for the same reasons and like it equally and these daft ideas about a woman's virtue will disappear."
No, they DO think about it differently, for one big thing, they pretty much always insist on attaching emotions and feelings with the act. Although it is more common today for women to just enjoy the act...they still aren't on the same level as guys on enjoying just screwing someone and being done with it...with no emotional baggage afterwards.
There's a reason behind there being old jokes like:
"What's the difference between a toilet and a woman?"
"The toilet doesn't follow you around whining after you've used it"
Yes, its from Truly Tasteless Jokes, but there is a hint of truth to it. Sure, sex can be great with caring, love, emotion, and the whole works of human feelings. But, it can also be pretty great on a physical level alone. And from most of my experience, men are still better at that than women...even today.
"Ok, I know this is/. and I know we all like to explain stuff and such. But dude, you don't tell a dad that his girl is gonna have sex one day. You just don't:("
I'm guessing making jokes about her being on the "pole" aren't too funny either, eh?
"If your 12 year old is the kind of person who is going to get knocked up, I doubt starting school earlier is really going to change that."
That's the truth, if she's going to school earlier, that means she gets off earlier...and home before YOU do.
I was banging my girlfriend at her house almost every afternoon after school, before out parents got off work. A parent is NOT going to stop it, but it sure helps if you aren't so uptight as to freak out if you find contraception around.
Ahh...it sure was nice back in the day...didn't have to worry too much about condoms (most all my girlfriends were on the pill). Back then you could fuck just about anything that moved, and the worst thing that might happen was you caught something that could easily be cured with a shot.
Well, here's to hoping maybe something will come out of all this, and maybe today or someday soon, a challenge to reign in the bastardization of the definition of the interstate commerce clause will take place. I'm sorry, but they have abused that to the extreme and it really wasn't meant to go this far unchecked.
Sadly, it somehow started with a farmer wanting to raise his own wheat for his own consumption....and they fucked it up from there.
"Easy, when you include the costs of living as well. Someone making $100k a year has a lot less money after rent/housing tax and food than someone making $1m, even if the first person pays 20% tax and the second person pays 40% tax. A roof over your head and food on the table is not an optional expense or some kind of luxury that you can forego when times are lean."
However, plans like the Fair Tax take the necessities of life into account, and there are rebates, etc on food and the like. I frankly don't see the point in a rebate, just don't tax them period. But once you do that...anything else over that is pretty much luxury, and sure you should pay your fair share. No on should get a completely 100% free ride. I think it was Ben Franklin that said something to the effect of making being poor as uncomfortable as it can be, so a person will be inclined to work hard to avoid it and get ahead in life.
Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with someone that makes a lot of money being able to enjoy most of it. After all, isn't that one of the main goals in life? To enable yourself to enjoy it?
"By your logic, the Americans With Disabilities Act is unconstitutional, as it forces private entities (businesses) to buy something (ramps, railings, elevators) or pay a fine."
While I will agree good things have come from that act....strictly speaking, I'm not sure what power the feds have enumerated by the constitutions to pass and enforce such an act. I can see how they could mandate it for federal buildings, I'm not sure how they can for private or even state buildings.
It has done good things, but honestly, I don't know that the feds really have that power? If so....from where?
"Most of the other provisions are definitely the purview of the federal government under the commerce clause."
Thing is...if they'd mandated that health insurance be purchased across state lines like car insurance...then THAT would be an actualy interstate commerce power they could / should use, but as far as I know..they didn't add that into the bill.
I'm sorry...but $200K - $250K is not rich. Extreme upper middle class maybe. Especially if you are a small business owner, say with an S corporation or LLC. All the income from business falls through onto your personal income, but it isnt' like you get to KEEP it all. Reinvestment in the company, etc.
Sure, you can expense a lot, and write off everything possible, but if you have some success...you get killed with these taxes. If this is a couple, and has a couple kids...this is not being rich.
And so many of the taxes they're raising are income taxes..which do not hit the super wealthy as they do not make their money from a W2 type job, but investments, etc.
Trouble is, if you start hitting investment income, then you start killing the retirement funds of so many of the middle class, and a huge percentage of the middle class are in the markets with 401K's, IRAs...etc.
And actually...I could see raising taxes a little, but for God's sake, how about the govt. tighten its belt and stop all the fucking spending of money they do not have?!?!
Sure a new program or two might be nice, but shit...we can't afford anymore, and need to cut to the bone waste and useless programs.
Personally, I wish they'd ditch the whole current tax system with its complexity,loopholes, etc...and do something like the Fair Tax (which has consideration for the poor with refunds and all for food purchases, etc). With that...you'd then catch your rich people, as that they usually spend lots of money on expensive things. And you'd catch more tax from illegal operators in this country, as that they have to spend money to live too....
"Bollocks. When a tax, by definition, only affects the top 2%, it ONLY AFFECTS THE TOP 2%! "
Trouble is, this isn't going to stop with the top 2%. Heck they used to say no more taxes for those making less than $250K (per couple I think). Well, in many parts of the US, that is NOT being wealthy. I think those living in SF and NYC might could vouch for that.
But not only that...as time has gone by, I'm hearing more and more politicians trying to lower the bar as to what is 'rich'...$200K....those making $150K are rich...etc.
Don't kid yourself, with this and new planned massive spending, they're gonna HAVE to start taxing pretty much everyone that is not on welfare. I forget the exact statistic, but something along the lines of the top 10%-15% or so already pay > 80% of the US's taxes. At some point, you can't squeeze more money out of them and have to hit lower hanging fruit. I hear already that new taxes are gonna move the effective top tax rates back up to near Carter era rates were....a number I heard was like 44%, especially when the Bush tax cuts expire. That just too much for the govt to take.
"If there were no lies, this plan would have overwhelming support. Everyone except the very rich and the insurance companies would support it."
Are you kidding?
The insurance companies were FULLY behind this. They're gonna make a killing off of Obamacare. Think about it..now EVERYONE has to have insurance. This will increase their roles by nearly a magnitude (ok, exaggerating there a little). And, best of all, they can likely now raise their rates since everyone will be mandated to have it or face fines.
"And it amazes me that a country full of people that supposedly care about their freedoms and whatnot, will gleefully hand over their rights to boards governed by petty backyard Napoleons just so they can buy in an area where someone else mows the grass."
I've always wondered how these things can be made enforceable...
I mean, why hasn't some lawyer taken and challenged these things. Isn't there something about not being able to sign your rights away on certain things...etc?
"Although I am almost rabid about the freedom of the public to know all things I wonder if anyone has estimated the costs involved in making all of the mentioned material available in digital form. It might eat up an awful lot of tax dollars."
I don't think after the passage of the recent health reform behemoth than anyone is worrying much any more over the spending of tax dollars.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe alcohol will also help kill the heat....hence, eating chile's and shooting tequila!!
Trouble with jalapenos...somewhere along the line someone thought it a good idea to breed the heat right out of them. So, when you go to the grocery store, you have no idea what heat level the damned things are.
They've not done that to serranos as far as I know, and they seem to have a nice 'crisp' taste to them. I put them in pretty much ALL of my salsas.
I've had good luck lately with raw diced serranos, mixed with roasted peeled and chopped poblano chiles in my green salsas of late.
Where can I get some of these to make some chili?!?!?
Anyone know if you can get these peppers a plants or seeds and grow them in the US?
I mean, Google Maps, sure I use that all the time to find where something is, directions how to get to it...on my iPhone, it even shows traffic loads.
I click Google Earth...it is neat how it zooms down to where I'm at from outer space..but after that...what?
Nope..need to ditch those too!!
Hmm...why haven't the Dem's taken it upon themselves to at LEAST let the parts of the Patriot Act due to sunset...go away?
Why did they very recently vote to keep all of it still working against us?
Basically, I don't think anyone but hard core far left liberals wanted the govt to run everything with a single payer system.
But don't worry..what we got is still a step in that direction. Obama and crew and their advisers (especially the advisers) have been on record in the past saying they'd not get it at once, that it would be a gradual takeover.
But really...moderate Dems, Reps, Tea Bag types, Independents, Libertarians...pretty much the majority of the US didn't want all this or worse as you described.
I've already heard rumblings of a federal VAT tax coming in on top of all of this. That's about the ONLY way they're going to be able to raise this kind of money to keep us from going into the debt hole and never getting out.
And now what is the trade off we have?
Well, it looks like we ALL will now have even more increased health coverage costs, both directly and indirectly. If you already have insurance through a company that is even halfway decent...you'll have to pay more for it. Indirectly? Just hearing on the news today that restaurants in the SF area are moving to adding a food service surcharge to all meals or items sold...so as to offset the cost by now having to offer freakin' health insurance to waiters/staff. Yep, so eating food out is gonna get more $$$.
Taxing people's insurance now that had good/decent coverage..etc. And most all of this right on top of the middle class income EARNERS.
It also means, the govt is gonna start taxing more on your retirement investments (dividends, etc)...so, you're gonna have even more trouble saving for retirement.
Frankly, I'm thinking this is an even more expensive tradeoff than you mentioned that we originally had.
And in a way...it is. Just another step on that slippery slope. You mean you won't mind the IRS checking monthly to see if you have proper health insurance purchased?
Yet they made it all the way to these generations, for most of the time, without having to have the government take money out of everyone's pocket to spend on the poor, the lazy, the incompetent, the criminal...etc. I don't have a problem with helping the poor, or the truly infirmed or elderly, but I'd prefer to do it like in the old days through voluntarily giving through charity.
Our social saftey net has become a way of life for too many these days...I prefer to go with something Ben Franklin is attributed: roughly, that we should make it as uncomfortable as possible to be poor...so as to encourage people to work hard to NOT be poor.
#1 Reason - Because son's don't get knocked up.
I've said it before on these types of topics and I'll say it again. While you are young...go FUCK as often as you can, and with as many people as you can!! Especially for a male, these are you fuck years. You are at the height of you stamina and libido. Enjoy it while you can. Enjoy sleeping with teenage chicks while you can...you only get a few years, so enjoy it while you can. (Depending on the consent laws in your particular state).
But do it...'cause as you get older, you do slow down, it is just a fact of life. Later, you'll likely settle down, marry, have kids...it moves to a different plane...but if you get it out of your system, you won't regret getting enough of the wild stuff when young and maybe try act out on that in middle life.
Sure, be careful, use protection (you have to these days I guess)....but fuck all you can while you are at your prime and enjoy it!!
No, they DO think about it differently, for one big thing, they pretty much always insist on attaching emotions and feelings with the act. Although it is more common today for women to just enjoy the act...they still aren't on the same level as guys on enjoying just screwing someone and being done with it...with no emotional baggage afterwards.
There's a reason behind there being old jokes like:
"What's the difference between a toilet and a woman?"
"The toilet doesn't follow you around whining after you've used it"
Yes, its from Truly Tasteless Jokes, but there is a hint of truth to it. Sure, sex can be great with caring, love, emotion, and the whole works of human feelings. But, it can also be pretty great on a physical level alone. And from most of my experience, men are still better at that than women...even today.
I'm guessing making jokes about her being on the "pole" aren't too funny either, eh?
That's the truth, if she's going to school earlier, that means she gets off earlier...and home before YOU do.
I was banging my girlfriend at her house almost every afternoon after school, before out parents got off work. A parent is NOT going to stop it, but it sure helps if you aren't so uptight as to freak out if you find contraception around.
Ahh...it sure was nice back in the day...didn't have to worry too much about condoms (most all my girlfriends were on the pill). Back then you could fuck just about anything that moved, and the worst thing that might happen was you caught something that could easily be cured with a shot.
Sadly, it somehow started with a farmer wanting to raise his own wheat for his own consumption....and they fucked it up from there.
However, plans like the Fair Tax take the necessities of life into account, and there are rebates, etc on food and the like. I frankly don't see the point in a rebate, just don't tax them period. But once you do that...anything else over that is pretty much luxury, and sure you should pay your fair share. No on should get a completely 100% free ride. I think it was Ben Franklin that said something to the effect of making being poor as uncomfortable as it can be, so a person will be inclined to work hard to avoid it and get ahead in life.
Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with someone that makes a lot of money being able to enjoy most of it. After all, isn't that one of the main goals in life? To enable yourself to enjoy it?
While I will agree good things have come from that act....strictly speaking, I'm not sure what power the feds have enumerated by the constitutions to pass and enforce such an act. I can see how they could mandate it for federal buildings, I'm not sure how they can for private or even state buildings.
It has done good things, but honestly, I don't know that the feds really have that power? If so....from where?
Thing is...if they'd mandated that health insurance be purchased across state lines like car insurance...then THAT would be an actualy interstate commerce power they could / should use, but as far as I know..they didn't add that into the bill.
Sure, you can expense a lot, and write off everything possible, but if you have some success...you get killed with these taxes. If this is a couple, and has a couple kids...this is not being rich.
And so many of the taxes they're raising are income taxes..which do not hit the super wealthy as they do not make their money from a W2 type job, but investments, etc.
Trouble is, if you start hitting investment income, then you start killing the retirement funds of so many of the middle class, and a huge percentage of the middle class are in the markets with 401K's, IRAs...etc.
And actually...I could see raising taxes a little, but for God's sake, how about the govt. tighten its belt and stop all the fucking spending of money they do not have?!?!
Sure a new program or two might be nice, but shit...we can't afford anymore, and need to cut to the bone waste and useless programs.
Personally, I wish they'd ditch the whole current tax system with its complexity,loopholes, etc...and do something like the Fair Tax (which has consideration for the poor with refunds and all for food purchases, etc). With that...you'd then catch your rich people, as that they usually spend lots of money on expensive things. And you'd catch more tax from illegal operators in this country, as that they have to spend money to live too....
Trouble is, this isn't going to stop with the top 2%. Heck they used to say no more taxes for those making less than $250K (per couple I think). Well, in many parts of the US, that is NOT being wealthy. I think those living in SF and NYC might could vouch for that.
But not only that...as time has gone by, I'm hearing more and more politicians trying to lower the bar as to what is 'rich'...$200K....those making $150K are rich...etc.
Don't kid yourself, with this and new planned massive spending, they're gonna HAVE to start taxing pretty much everyone that is not on welfare. I forget the exact statistic, but something along the lines of the top 10%-15% or so already pay > 80% of the US's taxes. At some point, you can't squeeze more money out of them and have to hit lower hanging fruit. I hear already that new taxes are gonna move the effective top tax rates back up to near Carter era rates were....a number I heard was like 44%, especially when the Bush tax cuts expire. That just too much for the govt to take.
Are you kidding?
The insurance companies were FULLY behind this. They're gonna make a killing off of Obamacare. Think about it..now EVERYONE has to have insurance. This will increase their roles by nearly a magnitude (ok, exaggerating there a little). And, best of all, they can likely now raise their rates since everyone will be mandated to have it or face fines.
I read it!!!
Of course.....I might be lying about that.
I've always wondered how these things can be made enforceable...
I mean, why hasn't some lawyer taken and challenged these things. Isn't there something about not being able to sign your rights away on certain things...etc?
I don't think after the passage of the recent health reform behemoth than anyone is worrying much any more over the spending of tax dollars.