iOS app Android app
Clicking Follow Back will add user to your friends list and may allow access to your Social News timeline..

HuffPost Social News

Badges:
Your Badges and the Badge Module will be removed from your profile

ilyushin84's Comments

View Comments:   Sort:
next
1 - 25
Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Commented Jul 8, 2013 at 23:37:14 in Politics

“So you support having *zero* protection against vote fraud, zero protection against non-citizens voting, zero protection against people voting multiple times, and zero protection against..say...republicans in Arizona, Oregon, and Nevada skipping into California to cast their republican votes there? Or republicans in Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi from casting votes in FL...or republicans in Indiana or Kentucky casting votes in Ohio...You see, liberal vote fraud isn't the only vote fraud. So protecting one is protecting the other. I do not support vote suppression. I support fraud suppression.

The problem is with liberalism is that it's okay with fraud if it advances their cause...then scream in self-righteous indignation when it backfires. All I'm sayin' is, if you want to keep California blue, vote on election day....support voter ID.”
Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Commented Jul 7, 2013 at 22:04:47 in Politics

“You have to remember all the things that are rights but still require ID and background checks. Like 2nd amendment rights. And that's fine. But asking someone to provide I.D. in order to prove citizenship, and therefore proving they have the right to vote, is perfectly logical and legit.

Now, if you want to say the state-issued ID should be free...okay, I think that's something that's a reasonable caveat. But saying people shouldn't have to prove they have the legal right to vote is simply and intentionally advocating an increase in voter fraud. That will only help libs in the short term. It wont in the long term.....Because if you implement laws that increase vote fraud, you're also guilty of suppressing votes because you're cancelling out legit votes with fraudulent votes. Guess what happens in a society where votes are ripped off?

That being said, I do support protections that require states to have quantity of polling stations that corresponds with population centers (not subjecting people to long lines) and not restricting hours in just certain polling stations, etc. People have the right to vote, free from voter suppression methods like the ones the VRA protected against...but people also have the right to vote in a system that doesn't blatantly permit vote fraud by allowing non-citizens to vote.”

MSaxe on Jul 8, 2013 at 21:41:14

“Explain your voter suppression rationalization to someone else. I don't buy it.

There are around 4% to 5% of citizens, possessing the right to vote, that cannot get voter ID's due to a variety of reasons you haven't the comprehension or interest to discover.”
Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Commented Jul 7, 2013 at 19:33:31 in Politics

“In that case, I apologize and a stand humbly corrected.

States should provide a proper number of polling places that corresponds with population centers and provide the same hours provided by other states. There should be uniformity and accessible hours for all polling stations.

I also agree that anything the government requires citizens to have regarding I.D. should be at no cost. All I expect is for our society to provide people with the means to exercise their right to vote *as well as* the means to prevent fraud that dilutes and supress legitimate votes. Even republican votes. If vote fraud is mitigated, I think that's a good thing.

While trying to pass laws that forbids I.D. for voting is fraudulent and vote suppression, so is screwing around with polling station hours, locations, and quantity. It's all vote suppression. None of it is good. It's how legitimate elections eventually decay into violent social unrest.”

donbrown on Jul 7, 2013 at 19:37:32

“Well said -- I am glad we agree.  I wish everyone were so reasonable.”
Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Commented Jul 7, 2013 at 16:16:36 in Politics

“You're saying minorities are systematically incapable of obtaining the same ID they use to purchase anything that requires an ID?

You're saying requiring ID will make minorities unable to vote at all?

Are you serious?”

KazooDan on Jul 7, 2013 at 16:43:00

“Where did I say anything about ID?”
Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Commented Jul 7, 2013 at 15:53:36 in Politics

“Did you know that what you just referenced, proving citizenship at registration, is what was just voted down recently in AZ. What you said is the exactly what got overturned.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/supreme-court-rules-arizona-citizenship-proof-law-illegal-article-1.1374762

Did you know that states CAN, however, require people to swear (under penalty of perjury, however) that they are citizens?

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-voter-registration-law-survives-u.s.-supreme-court-decision/article/3853574

So, did you know that there is ZERO verification of citizenship when people register?

Didn't think so.

Next time, actually find out if what you want to say is true before posting it. You'll look a little less silly.”
Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Commented Jul 7, 2013 at 15:34:48 in Politics

“oh c'mon. The republican party is going to be irrelevant by 2020 on the federal/national level. Once the amnesty creates 13 million democratic voters (in 10 years or so), it'll be over for republicans.

How does this target minorities? Can anyone explain that? I mean, showing ID? When was the last time a grocery store was sued because it wouldn't sell wine to a black person who couldn't show ID? When was the last time a minority sued the government because showing ID was too onerous a burden in order to purchase a firearm? When was the last time a latino sued because they were carded to buy a pack of smokes? When was the last time any minority was self-righteously indignant because they were going to an R-rated movie and the theater asked for them to prove they were of age?

You think I have to pass a background check to exercise my right to own a firearm. And I'm racist for wanting people to show an ID to prove they have the right to vote. Is that about right?”

donbrown on Jul 7, 2013 at 19:21:01

“You misunderstand my position.

I have no problem with providing extra ID, in addition to what these people have been using for years -- as long as it is provided free of charge. You should not have to pay extra to vote. Along with these new voter ID laws, if the means to obtain one without charge is also provided and explained, I have no problem at all...

However you ignore THE OTHER suppression devices, like shortened hours and shrinking number of polling places that guarantee long, inconvenient lines for working people that cannot afford to spend hours waiting.

Understand now?”
Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Commented Jul 7, 2013 at 15:27:40 in Politics

“Yes...except it doesn't, because the idea of republicans seeing a mass exodus of minority voters to the democratic party implies that the republicans have a mass of minority voters. Lolz.”

MSaxe on Jul 7, 2013 at 21:25:22

“It isn't only minority voters that are angered by voter suppression attempts and the reversal of the Voting Rights Act.

You have to remember that the VRA was passed by almost entirely white politicians in the first place. Whites from both the left and center will also come out to preserve voting rights for all.”
Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Commented Jul 7, 2013 at 15:26:48 in Politics

“He's right, though. I mean, how can republicans lose what they don't have?”

KazooDan on Jul 7, 2013 at 15:38:59

“By trying to see to it that those folks aren't able to vote at all.”
Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Commented Jul 7, 2013 at 15:25:41 in Politics

“How is this damaging for their election changes?

Minorities are a monolith voting bloc. 95% dems for black folks, 75%+ dems for Latino and asians.

Nothing makes your vote irrelevant like being monolithic. Their chances are the same with minorities regardless regardless of this law. The minority individuals that vote republican (all 12 of them) do so because they're not into central planning, wealth redistribution, etc, etc. They're not going to be phased by being asked for the same burden of proof as getting into an R-rated movie.

Republicans will lose zero minority votes over this. They have nothing to fear from minority backlash at this point.”
Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Voting Rights Ruling, Threat To MLK's Dream, Poses Backlash Danger For GOP

Commented Jul 7, 2013 at 15:19:27 in Politics

“No one's taking away anyone's right to vote. How are you equating this with the right to vote? Voter ID isn't denying the right to vote. It's simply verifying that the person in the booth actually has the right to vote. Kind of like me having to have a permit to have a firearm. It's a right, but I have to prove I'm eligible for it.

About minorities not tolerating the GOP....oohhh yeah....the GOP is gonna lose LOTS of minority votes of this. Lolz. Minorities range from a monolithic bloc vote (african american) to a near monolithic bloc vote (latino/asian). So, the potential for anything republicans do to have any consequences is essentially nil. Like they're really going to lose the 5% of the black vote they get now. C'mon. Get real.”

zelduh on Jul 7, 2013 at 15:26:59

“Did you know that, when a person registers to vote, their citizenship is VERIFIED before they get their voting information?

Didn't think so.”
Glenn Greenwald: Edward Snowden Confirmed WikiLeaks Statement Was Written By Him

Glenn Greenwald: Edward Snowden Confirmed WikiLeaks Statement Was Written By Him

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 23:02:51 in Politics

“What's funny is this: There's this idea out there that "If you're not going anything wrong, you don't have anything to fear."

So, if that's true, why does the government so vehemently and aggressively prosecute whistle-blowers that reveal what the government is going? Has anyone seen the video of the U.S. military shredding up unarmed CNN journalists that Manning released through wikileaks? People actually think the government shouldn't be held accountable for that and that the person who told the public about it should be in prison?

You actually want the government to break the law at your expense, under the premise of protecting you from a foreign threat, while our border remains unsecured and porous while our military gets involved in other people's civil wars? This actually makes sense to you?”
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 22:10:58 in Business

“You can have taxable income. You can have lots, in fact. Just so long as you don't have more taxes than you're going to owe withheld from your paycheck, they can't collect the fee.

But you're absolutely right...the Democratic premise is unbeatable. Simply promise to take from those that have more than the majority and give it to the majority, and you'll win elections.

"Your neighbor makes more than you. Elect me, and I will take from him/her and give to you."

That's an unbeatable pitch.”

David Furritus on Jul 6, 2013 at 22:13:37

“Thanks. And that is a shame. Playing upon people's insecurities and pointing out how other people dare to have more than you (regardless of the situation) has been a very popular strategy of the modern Democrats...”
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 21:14:30 in Business

“Edit: I meant to say : I don't think it's bad...I think it's good.”
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 21:13:45 in Business

“I did...but the problem is, the IRS is saying the exact opposite of what you said.

Sorry, but every publication and government response pretty much makes it clear that the IRS can't collect the penalty using liens, levies, or criminal proceedings. Ergo, no garnishments from wages, no judgments on my credit report...nothing.

I'm not saying it's good. In fact, I think it is good. I like the way the law is written. It gives people the option to participate in the shared responsibility. What's so bothersome about that? I'm sure there is a decent number of people that will endure the higher premiums for the greater good. Just not all.”
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 21:09:34 in Business

“oh my...you didn't read the article did you? If one were to read it, you'll see why no one will owe back taxes regarding the fraudulent tax credits.

Not only that, people can say their employer provided them coverage, even tho they didn't, and they don't have to pay the penalty.

The government even said they're just going to have to live with it. So, yeah...good luck with that.”
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 20:17:15 in Business

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/05/us-usa-healthcare-exchanges-idUSBRE96402X20130705

omg this is hilarious...

So not only can people completely dodge the higher premiums, people who make what I make can simply say they make $18k per year and get maximum subsidies even though they make $170k

You guys weren't kidding when you said "affordable care", were ya? ROTFLMAO....”

shelby-ann on Jul 6, 2013 at 20:29:30

“syre that can, if they can get away with it, and then they can owe the excess tax credits they took at the end when the year when they file their taxes”
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 20:10:25 in Business

“Even better, other people are going to milk this, too...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/05/us-usa-healthcare-exchanges-idUSBRE96402X20130705

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/07/06/not-qualified-for-obamacares-subsidies-just-lie-govt-to-use-honor-system-without-verifying-your-eligibility/

People can put in whatever income they want on the exchanges, and the government isn't going to even follow up and verify if any of it is accurate. Everyone can say they make $20k a year and get huge subsidies even though they make $100k...

C'mon Ed...you don't have to admit anything wrong with your ideology by admitting this law is absolutely laughable.”
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 20:07:54 in Business

“This is what the IRS said :

"The IRS routinely works with taxpayers who owe amounts they cannot afford to pay. The law prohibits the IRS from using liens or levies to collect any payment you owe related to the individual responsibility provision, if you, your spouse or a dependent included on your tax return does not have minimum essential coverage. However, if you owe a shared responsibility payment, the IRS may offset that liability against any tax refund you may be due."

So when it says "the law prohibits the IRS from using liens and levies to collect any payment owe related to the individual responsibility provision" and "however, if you owe a shared responsibility payment, the IRS may offset that liability against any tax refund you may be due"....you're interpreting that as the exact opposite of what they're saying? They can't have a judgement entered against me. (that's what goes on credit reports)

Face it, your peeps screwed the pooch on this one. Just own it instead of making yourself look ridiculous by insisting the IRS is going to do the very things the ACA and the IRS itself admits it cannot do. And I'm not the only one with this idea:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2012/07/03/some-tax-few-will-face-obamacare-uninsured-penalty-and-irs-hamstrung-to-collect/
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 19:55:26 in Business

“It's #25....”

ilyushin84 on Jul 6, 2013 at 21:14:30

“Edit: I meant to say : I don't think it's bad...I think it's good.”

ilyushin84 on Jul 6, 2013 at 21:13:45

“I did...but the problem is, the IRS is saying the exact opposite of what you said.

Sorry, but every publication and government response pretty much makes it clear that the IRS can't collect the penalty using liens, levies, or criminal proceedings. Ergo, no garnishments from wages, no judgments on my credit report...nothing.

I'm not saying it's good. In fact, I think it is good. I like the way the law is written. It gives people the option to participate in the shared responsibility. What's so bothersome about that? I'm sure there is a decent number of people that will endure the higher premiums for the greater good. Just not all.”

Ed Cage on Jul 6, 2013 at 20:46:30

“ilyushin84 I just addressed this 5 minutes ago. Check your email notices.”
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 18:32:16 in Business

“Okay, here's one of the many links I've posted:

http://www.irs.gov/uac/Questions-and-Answers-on-the-Individual-Shared-Responsibility-Provision

It's the IRS themselves answering the very questions we're debating here. Does this work for you? Do you need a more authoritative source than the IRS about how the IRS is going to collect the penalties? I mean, really...it's very clear.”
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 18:14:19 in Business

“Here is the IRS, on #25, specifically addressing this issue.

http://www.irs.gov/uac/Questions-and-Answers-on-the-Individual-Shared-Responsibility-Provision

does this link work for ya? :)”

ilyushin84 on Jul 6, 2013 at 20:10:25

“Even better, other people are going to milk this, too...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/05/us-usa-healthcare-exchanges-idUSBRE96402X20130705

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/07/06/not-qualified-for-obamacares-subsidies-just-lie-govt-to-use-honor-system-without-verifying-your-eligibility/

People can put in whatever income they want on the exchanges, and the government isn't going to even follow up and verify if any of it is accurate. Everyone can say they make $20k a year and get huge subsidies even though they make $100k...

C'mon Ed...you don't have to admit anything wrong with your ideology by admitting this law is absolutely laughable.”

ilyushin84 on Jul 6, 2013 at 20:07:54

“This is what the IRS said :

"The IRS routinely works with taxpayers who owe amounts they cannot afford to pay. The law prohibits the IRS from using liens or levies to collect any payment you owe related to the individual responsibility provision, if you, your spouse or a dependent included on your tax return does not have minimum essential coverage. However, if you owe a shared responsibility payment, the IRS may offset that liability against any tax refund you may be due."

So when it says "the law prohibits the IRS from using liens and levies to collect any payment owe related to the individual responsibility provision" and "however, if you owe a shared responsibility payment, the IRS may offset that liability against any tax refund you may be due"....you're interpreting that as the exact opposite of what they're saying? They can't have a judgement entered against me. (that's what goes on credit reports)

Face it, your peeps screwed the pooch on this one. Just own it instead of making yourself look ridiculous by insisting the IRS is going to do the very things the ACA and the IRS itself admits it cannot do. And I'm not the only one with this idea:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2012/07/03/some-tax-few-will-face-obamacare-uninsured-penalty-and-irs-hamstrung-to-collect/

Ed Cage on Jul 6, 2013 at 19:45:46

“ilyushin84 you said, "(I get no tax refund, so no penalty. Free insurance for healthy uninsured.)” …And “(my ability to simply not get insurance and enjoy massive savings on a monthly and yearly basis. If I get sick, I'll get insurance. When I am no longer sick, I'll dump it.)”

The ability of the IRS to garnish all or part of your tax refund requires an IRS lien. That means that your credit will be adversely affected, your ability to buy (including your rate) home or car insurance will likely be affected, and any purchase of a home will be affected and possibly disqualified. Upper echelon employers or high responsibility jobs may examine your credit as well.

Although the lien may not be used to collect monthly payments except for a tax refund there is no provision that your estate or inheritance or possible bankruptcy won’t be affected. Unless you are indigent with no income, your above assumption “(Free insurance)” is not substantiated by http://www.irs.gov/uac/Questions-and-Answers-on-the-Individual-Shared-Responsibility-Provision
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 18:10:06 in Business

“Okay, let me simplify this for you:

First of all, it's actually $3.4 billion in rebates, not $1.1 billion. I can't believe you actually need me to help you with your own argument. Secondly, that averages out to $100 per family:

http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2013pres/06/20130620a.html

The question is...do you *really* think the typical family's insurance has gone up only $100 per YEAR (that's only $9 per month)?

That $3.4 billion refund/$100 per family refund is much smaller than the double digit increases from 2010-2012 and the 6.3% increase for 2013. Face it, we were promised the average american family would see $2500 in savings in healthcare costs, and we know that costs on the average american family has actually gone up:

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/10/factchecking-health-insurance-premiums/

"An increase still isn't a decrease"”
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 17:24:50 in Business

“I posted links several times...but ok, here ya go:

Here's one from irs.gov that says *exactly* what I'm saying...read the very last one, #25, which the IRS says exactly what I'm saying:

http://www.irs.gov/uac/Questions-and-Answers-on-the-Individual-Shared-Responsibility-Provision

This one specifically highlights an individual doing exactly what I'm referring to:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/13/readers-ask-we-answer-what-happens-if-you-dont-pay-obamacares-tax-penalty/

Here's another that notes the *only* tool the IRS has is to collect from refunds:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2012/07/03/some-tax-few-will-face-obamacare-uninsured-penalty-and-irs-hamstrung-to-collect/

So, I mean, the IRS said it...left and right wing media says it. The *only* group I see that are refuting it are low-info activists who are either going to have to come to grips with it or go crazy. Either way, I win.”
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 17:10:49 in Business

“Comparing that $1.1 billion in refunds against the 3 years of premium increases proves me right.”

shelby-ann on Jul 6, 2013 at 17:18:56

“1.1 billion is premium decreases”
Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Obamacare Employer Mandate Delayed For One Year

Commented Jul 6, 2013 at 16:52:44 in Business

“That's typically the case when it comes to ideas that are so good they have to be mandatory. Though I would be more apt to call it the "Less Affordable Care Act" because those who "choose" to participate in it are going to pay a lot more. My premiums would go from $600 (already too much, IMO) to just under $800. But with the law, I can no pay $0. I know it's going to raise the cost for those who choose to participate, but it's their choice to participate. It was their choice to vote for people who would impose the costs of their healthcare on me, and because they thought that was okay to do, I'm going to bow out of the system and only pay for what I use.

http://cafewitteveen.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/427894_4245690792324_371655425_n.jpeg
next
1 - 25