Chucktshoes

It's a real bitch to get told that you got taken, isn't it? When you find out that thing you thought was a good deal was really just a scam. Luke, you should be concerned with those SCOTUS cases for the simple reason that they explain the truth of what SS really is, and it isn't what you've think you've bought. When I speak of "no accrued property rights", I am not talking about an account somewhere marked with your name on it that you will draw from. I mean that the government can change the criteria for receiving the welfare portion of SS tomorrow, making you ineligible to get it, and you would have absolutely zero legal grounds to contest it. You would have to accept your lumps and move on without it. Mike, nope. The fund is, and always has been nothing more than an accounting trick. Nothing more than a line item on the ledger that could be (and was!) shifted one place or another as needed.

Go on and on about travel bans all you want. The virus will spread regardless of what governments do. For the tinfoilers fretting about the end of the world from Ebola, I'd like to present to you the "Nairobi Tabletop Scenario". http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/10/141015-ebola-virus-outbreak-pandemic-zoonotic-contagion/ Let me add to it a little. Now imagine that businessman's brother, whom he visits with once he gets home, is a truck driver. He passes along Ebola with an errant cough on him. The trucker brother goes on the road the next day for 3 weeks. He crisscrosses the country from coast to coast leaving it with fuel desk attendants, fast food clerks and waitresses all along the way.

I would look to Tipton or Fayette counties or even farther out. Gonna have to push your drive times to that hour mark or even possibly a bit more to get what you are after.

Exactly.

This is what so many don't realize about SS, it isn't in any way shape form or fashion a retirement program. It is really two things. On one end it is a payroll tax just like any other and is deposited into the treasury without any earmark. On the other end it is a welfare program. Neither end creates an accrued property right to the money that was stolen from the folks paying in. If you doubt that, consult the 1960 SCOTUS decision Fleming v. Nestor which stated that nobody has a right to collect SS and Helvering v. Davis (1937), where the Court had ruled that Social Security was not a contributory insurance program, saying, “The proceeds of both the employee and employer taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like any other internal revenue generally, and are not earmarked in any way.”

Oh, to the OP, good luck. I left a job full of terrible management types this year as well. It's a wonderful feeling to know you are free from a particular hell and that the future has possibility again.

If you can't afford to save, then you AREN'T living within your means no matter how much you think you are. The reality is that most folks don't have as much means as they think they do. As far as social security goes, just because person A stole from person B, it doesn't justify person B stealing from person C.

I was at the fedex facility by DFW picking up a load a couple of days ago. The gate guard asked us, "have you visited West Africa or been in contact with someone who has been to West Africa in the last 30 days." :lol:

Saw them open up for Katy Perry last week. Really enjoyed them. Been a familiar with them for about 15 years, just the first time I got to see them live. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9e9NSMY8QiQ http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dSGbOmW4AjI

Items paid for with EBT are not charged sales tax. The amount paid for with a coupon is reimbursed as cash by the issuer of that coupon. That is the reason that tax is collected on the amount paid for by a coupon.

“The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the facts in controversy.” — John Jay, 1st Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

As always, innocent people are punished because of potential misuse by others. Here's an idea, how about we quit trying to tell folks how to conduct their lives and let them do what they choose as long as they don't violate others. We must end this immoral war on drugs.

No. There's got to be a big chunk of data missing from this equation.

[quote name="TMF" post="1189841" timestamp="1410748185"]It isn't about wishing for it to happen, this is about it being a very likely outcome as he chooses to ratchet it up. You think he will stop at body armor, rifle and yelling like a madman??? He will take this further, causing someone to have REASONABLE fear for their lives or the lives if others and he will be shot. He does not exist in a vacuum. Believe it or not, people with guns have watched the news, and active shooter events happen. How many threads are on this very damn site regarding how one would act to an active shooter? You think nobody will take him as one when he takes it to the next level? I do, and the shooter all absolutely be justified for shooting him according to the law.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote] I'd be predisposed to return a no-bill on that indictment if I was on the grand jury, not that I think it would ever make it to a grand jury. Because of his history, I would expect LE agencies in the area to familiarize their officers with him, but I wouldn't expect the average person to have any idea who this fucknut is. While I really do hate what he is doing, I don't wish harm to come to him. I just expect it to happen eventually. My prior "defense" of him had nothing to do with him or his actions and everything to do with the blatant malfeasance of the government in handling his shenanigans. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I'd probably wouldn't buy anything but I'd see about tinkering in the garage and see about building a Luty and a Sten just for the hell of it.

[quote name="mikegideon" post="1189677" timestamp="1410711652"]What I been sayin' :)[/quote] I know. I think we both want to see the same end result, We've only differed with how we are willing to see it achieved.

I really, really hate this fucker.

[quote name="SWJewellTN" post="1188835" timestamp="1410449838"]Regardless of who actually started the fire, the situation came about due to BATF trapping them by having an "Informant" sell them a shotgun slightly under 16 inches.[/quote] That was Randy Weaver @ Ruby Ridge.

[quote name="Omega" post="1188832" timestamp="1410448846"]Wasn't the fire started by the branch guys?[/quote] No. The gas canisters used by the ATF started the fires.

You've got to be shitting me. Apparently the sick bastards are still proud of roasting dozens of people, including 20 children, alive. I doubt there will be any mention that it all could have been avoided were the ATF not in need of a splashy show to secure their funding. [URL]http://blog.chron.com/narcoconfidential/2014/09/atf-houston-to-unveil-model-re-creation-of-controversial-waco-standoff/#26525101=2[/URL]

[quote name="Hershmeister" post="1187859" timestamp="1410226225"]I am still waiting for the answer of how you get all the anarchists to agree to a common set of rules and then the enforcement mechanism."Leave me alone" only works so long as people actually do that. How does your anarchist society deal with a criminal, or a person who cheats someone, or a litterer, or a murderer.[/quote] The simple answer is, you don't. Those answers are different for every voluntary organization that people choose to be a part of. That's the key, choice. You keep asking for single, one size fits all practical answers. Some voluntary organizations will provide more protection than others and will require the relinquishment of more individual autonomy in order accomplish those ends. Some will require less and provide less. I think our disconnect is that you are focused on the practical arguments and I am focused on the moral ones. In many ways an anarchist society will definitely be less orderly and less clear than the current statist model, no doubt. That's not my argument. I don't claim anarchy will solve the problems of pain. I simply make the moral argument that a group of people calling themselves "government" has no more right or moral authority to engage in theft, kidnapping and murder than an individual does. Evil is evil no matter the who or why behind it.

[quote name="TMF" post="1187534" timestamp="1410158684"] John Walker Lindh (May he be raped to death by rhinos) was a white boy from California, and after a beard and a tan he fit right in with Taliban militia. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote] Do you really think he is Lamar Alexander and John McCain's type?

[quote name="Hershmeister" post="1187486" timestamp="1410143739"]Frankly your argumentation reminds me of Anjem Chaudry who when confronted with the evils of radical islam and shariah law in contries like saudi arabia, he replies by saying that they are not implenting it correctly - and then conveniently ducks shedding any light on what that might looks like - because he answer is of course tyranny.[/quote] The very same thing applies to your defense of the state. I would say more so in that I don't claim to have all the answers. I only say this current way doesn't work and hasn't in every version ever tried, let's try another path.

The reason I focus on taxation is that without that theft, the state cannot provide for the enforcement of its edicts. Natural law is very simple. I own myself and therefore I own the fruits of my labor. I am responsible for the protection of my property and if I so choose, may voluntarily contract with a private entity to provide those services. If the law in question does not involve a violation of someone's life, liberty or property than it isn't law, but tyranny. Every other service government claims a monopoly over suffers in quality. Why would the courts be any different? Allow the market the opportunity to find the proper solutions.