Larry,

The 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913 and became law. That it was
ratified was certified by Knox, the Secretary of State. Whether you believe
that or not is immaterial to me. I answered your question by citing the
appropriate laws. You sound like a "tax loony".

Dave M.

"Steve Lusardi" skrev i melding
...
My claim comes from 25 years of personal experience. I have lived and
worked all over Europe and I am telling you public health IS a failure
everywhere. Your opinion is based on what? Perhaps books, magazines, TV or
was it some idealist talking trash. Please note my previous comment about
the American biased media. You are being sucked in. Come over here and
experiece the failure yourself. Pay the 55% tax, experience the waiting
lines or the denial of treatment or a drug, because it isn't approved.
Watch your neighbor suffer for a year or more because there is no room in
your designated hospital or die because the appropriate treatment is too
expensive for a person of age. Public health is not the solution for
universal health. This lesson has been learned.
Steve


I suggest that you never lived in Europe, or that your memory is failing
you.
I live in Norway, my annual income is around $ 100 000.
The tax I pay is around 30%, this is including health insurance and pension.
If I visit my doctor I pay a small fee, as I also do for medicine,
but expences exciding $200 a year are free. Hospital is free, you may have
to wait a few weeks depending on your illness. My mother who is
85 waited 4 weeks for a hip operation, which of course war free, as was 4
weeks in a nursing home after the operation.
When I retire I will get a pension of £35 000 per year, not so much, but as
we have progessiv taxasion the tax will be low.
Of course if you want additional and privat insurance or pension that is up
to you.
I think we are in line with most European countries, I have not heard
anything near to your story. Even former Eastern Europe had a good and free
health care.
And as this also is a cruising NG that I follow, I will mention that i have
a sailboat, Kelt 850.
Jan

On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 18:00:49 GMT, Jere Lull wrote:

On 2008-11-02 10:15:00 -0500, Douglas Berry
said:

John Cleese was on Countdown the other night, and he said that he
didn't want a President he could have a beer with, he wanted a
Pressident so brilliant, so well-informed, that Cleese would be afraid
to open his mouth for fear of showing what an idiot he is.

Watch it yourself, seeing John Cleese doubled over in laughter is
great.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUnGfYvXMwg

Olbermann may have given the most truthful assessment: that his salary
is paid by the manufactured controversy.

There is hardly a whit of difference between the two RepubliCrat candidates.

If you know anything about econcomics you would not say that.

Under one, we have a chance to get out of this credit disaster, under
the other - not a prayer. Kiss your job goodby.

"David L. Martel" wrote in
:

Larry,

The 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913 and became law. That it was
ratified was certified by Knox, the Secretary of State. Whether you
believe that or not is immaterial to me. I answered your question by
citing the appropriate laws. You sound like a "tax loony".

Dave M.




So, just like in the book "1984", if a bureaucrat says it's so, even if
it's full of holes, it's so, is that it? Knox KNEW the states had
modified the act in a whole range of states, but ignored them and said
it was so, anyways certifying, falsely of course, the original document
the bankers wanted to fund the debt repayment....

I suppose you are correct. It's still being done, even today, as with
the Florida recount Bush wanted stopped and got his Supreme Court
cronies to certify, putting a halt to an embarrassing political antic of
his brother.

I see. So, what's the sense of voting on anything? We just let the
ruling cults and elitists run everything, just like Orwell's "1984",
rewriting history with a pack of lies to make what the elite want as the
truth, the truth, even when it's not.

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery

Arbeit Macht Frei - Work brings freedom
http://www.travelblog.org/Photos/461096.html

We are simply doomed to repeat it, over and over again.

sign me,
"Tax Loony"

"Jan" wrote in
:

I suggest that you never lived in Europe, or that your memory is
failing you.
I live in Norway, my annual income is around $ 100 000.
The tax I pay is around 30%, this is including health insurance and
pension. If I visit my doctor I pay a small fee, as I also do for
medicine, but expences exciding $200 a year are free. Hospital is
free, you may have to wait a few weeks depending on your illness. My
mother who is 85 waited 4 weeks for a hip operation, which of course
war free, as was 4 weeks in a nursing home after the operation.
When I retire I will get a pension of œ35 000 per year, not so much,
but as we have progessiv taxasion the tax will be low.
Of course if you want additional and privat insurance or pension that
is up to you.
I think we are in line with most European countries, I have not heard
anything near to your story. Even former Eastern Europe had a good and
free health care.
And as this also is a cruising NG that I follow, I will mention that i
have a sailboat, Kelt 850.
Jan




Jan, my apologies for the Americans' view of socialized medicine
expressed to you. They are under constant, heavy pressure by the
billionaire doctors' union, the American Medical Association, who has a
lot to lose if Americans ever get any kind of socialized medicine that
doesn't leave the poor bleeding in the streets. Many of the posters
here are those very rich American doctors sailing their new yachts as a
result of the American system of massive payments for the most mediocre
medical service, while the other major criminals in the medical
business, the insurance companies between the doctors' riches and the
victims' wallets skim off as much or maybe more than the doctors get...a
double taxation on the working class buying medical insurance. Medical
insurance companies do not become amazingly rich by paying doctor and
hospital bills of sick people. On the contrary, medical insurance
companies want nothing to do with any kind of medical risk patients,
only the medically fit that don't make large claims with the resources
to pay large insurance premiums for no service, thousands per month.
This medical burden also causes EMPLOYERS' to flee under the heavy load
of the American medical profession's love of wealth, the reason
everything that used to be made in America has now moved off to more
socialized countries of Asia and Europe where employers don't have to
pay outrageous medical insurance premiums to enrich the medical and
insurance classes.

Noone in America gives a shit about providing healthcare to the poor,
the unemployed, old retired people....unless they band together and
throw politicians into the street, of course.

You'll never convince any Americans who've never been the beneficiaries
of another country's socialist medical system, like the systems in
civilized European countries, that anything good comes out of them.
They've always been told otherwise by the Ministry of Propaganda known
as American News Media.

The concept of paying doctors bonuses to PREVENT diseases in the first
place is totally foreign to them. Doctors make money here by making
people SICK, heavily dosing them with recurrant drugs at exhorbitant
prices to keep them on the hook, so to speak, just like any drug dealer
on the street.

I have a saying, "Well people don't make payments on waterfront
property." Well people don't have to pay doctors, so are not the big
cash cow. SICK people make doctors billionaires. The country is loaded
up with hypocondriacs (sp??) who are just SO proud of their last $70,000
operation they can't wait to tell you all about it. My parents were two
of them. The day my father died, his pharmacist lost $8000/month in
prescription sales, alone. His doctor lost thousands, too. He was one
of the "science project" patients that keep paying and paying and
paying...for that waterfront mansion they live in and the new Mercedes
in their garages....

ON TOPIC - Not to mention their new Beneteau at the finest marina in the
city....(c;

Larry wrote:


Noone in America gives a shit about providing healthcare to the poor,
the unemployed, old retired people....unless they band together and
throw politicians into the street, of course.

Therein lies a big part of the problem. Americans hate poor people. They
think they're all lazy bums who have no ambition.

I think Matthew Fox put it perfectly on "Lost"

Live together or die alone.

Americans have to understand that they would be stronger as a nation, as
a people if they helped those that can't help themselves. Not all the
poor are lazy bums.

..


--

We must change the way we live,
or the climate will do it for us.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oCYW4ScUnw

Larry,

Someone could have raised the issue of the difference in language used by
the various ratifying States but no one has successfully. I doubt that you
will either..
I gather that you now accept that I did cite the correct laws. Even
though you feel that these laws may need judicial review.

Dave M.

According to the United States Government Printing Office, the
following states ratified the amendment:

Alabama (August 10, 1909)
Kentucky (February 8, 1910)
South Carolina (February 19, 1910)
Illinois (March 1, 1910)
Mississippi (March 7, 1910)
Oklahoma (March 10, 1910)
Maryland (April 8, 1910)
Georgia (August 3, 1910)
Texas (August 16, 1910)
Ohio (January 19, 1911)
Idaho (January 20, 1911)
Oregon (January 23, 1911)
Washington (January 26, 1911)
Montana (January 27, 1911)
Indiana (January 30, 1911)
California (January 31, 1911)
Nevada (January 31, 1911)
South Dakota (February 1, 1911)
Nebraska (February 9, 1911)
North Carolina (February 11, 1911)
Colorado (February 15, 1911)
North Dakota (February 17, 1911)
Michigan (February 23, 1911)
Iowa (February 24, 1911)
Kansas (March 2, 1911)
Missouri (March 16, 1911)
Maine (March 31, 1911)
Tennessee (April 7, 1911)
Arkansas (April 22, 1911), after having previously rejected the
amendment
Wisconsin (May 16, 1911)
New York (July 12, 1911)
Arizona (April 3, 1912)
Minnesota (June 11, 1912)
Louisiana (June 28, 1912)
West Virginia (January 31, 1913)
New Mexico (February 3, 1913)
Ratification (by the requisite thirty-six states) was completed on
February 3, 1913 with the ratification by New Mexico. The amendment
was subsequently ratified by the following states, bringing the total
number of ratifying states to forty-two of the forty-eight then
existing:

37. Delaware (February 3, 1913)
38. Wyoming (February 3, 1913)
39. New Jersey (February 4, 1913)
40. Vermont (February 19, 1913)
41. Massachusetts (March 4, 1913)
42. New Hampshire (March 7, 1913), after rejecting the amendment on
March 2, 1911
The following states rejected the amendment without ever subsequently
ratifying it:

Connecticut
Florida (rejected the amendment after it had already been ratified by
three-fourths of the states)
Rhode Island
Utah
The following states never took up the proposed amendment:

Pennsylvania
Virginia

"clouddreamer" wrote in message
m...
Bill Kearney wrote:

Ah yes, the specious 'racist' argument. Anyone daring to criticize their
almighty Obama must be a racist.

It's racist because you say this about Obama without a comment on Palin's
lack of experience

No, you're the one so frantic and foaming at the mouth that you're desperate
to raise such a specious argument.

In article ,
"Bill Kearney" said:

Hardly. I'm just not interested in seeing someone with so few
creditials suitable for the job be elected to it. That his ass
happens to be black has nothing to do with it. Shame on you for
trying to insinuate otherwise. Who's the closest racist here,
you, more likely.

What do you think the creditials suitable for the job of President
are?

-- wds

William December Starr wrote:

In article

,
"Bill Kearney" said:

Hardly. I'm just not interested in seeing
someone with so few
creditials suitable for the job be elected to
it. That his ass
happens to be black has nothing to do with it.
Shame on you for
trying to insinuate otherwise. Who's the
closest racist here, you, more likely.

What do you think the creditials suitable for
the job of President are?

-- wds

Lets try leadership and selecting superior
advisors and key people around you.

Obama wins on both. Bush and McShame lost/loose
on both. McShame can not even organize his OWN
CAMPAIGN. Do you think he would do any better
leading the entire country???????

On Nov 1, 4:28*pm, Douglas Berry
wrote:
On *Sat, 01 Nov 2008 09:49:37 -0500 Jangchub
carved the following into the hard stone of alt.atheism

Wait, Palin went to five colleges to get her degree in what, who
knows.

Jounalism. She wanted to be a sports reporter and ended up a weather
girl.

I think if you look again, you'll see she's "ended up" as Governor
of Alaska, candidate for VP, and possibly future President of
the United States.

--
Walt

In article Xns9B49D8A4C3C2Enoonehomecom@
74.209.131.13, Larry said...

A little History is in order....

http://www.givemeliberty.org/feature...otratified.htm

That's your problem: you know only "a little" history.

Heed Pope's warning about taking only sips from the
spring of knowledge, and perhaps you will stop
gibbering like a madman.


--
-----------
Brian E. Clark

But the wording of the Amendment was different in several of the states.


"DoctorD" wrote in message
...
According to the United States Government Printing Office, the
following states ratified the amendment:

Alabama (August 10, 1909)
Kentucky (February 8, 1910)
South Carolina (February 19, 1910)
Illinois (March 1, 1910)
Mississippi (March 7, 1910)
Oklahoma (March 10, 1910)
Maryland (April 8, 1910)
Georgia (August 3, 1910)
Texas (August 16, 1910)
Ohio (January 19, 1911)
Idaho (January 20, 1911)
Oregon (January 23, 1911)
Washington (January 26, 1911)
Montana (January 27, 1911)
Indiana (January 30, 1911)
California (January 31, 1911)
Nevada (January 31, 1911)
South Dakota (February 1, 1911)
Nebraska (February 9, 1911)
North Carolina (February 11, 1911)
Colorado (February 15, 1911)
North Dakota (February 17, 1911)
Michigan (February 23, 1911)
Iowa (February 24, 1911)
Kansas (March 2, 1911)
Missouri (March 16, 1911)
Maine (March 31, 1911)
Tennessee (April 7, 1911)
Arkansas (April 22, 1911), after having previously rejected the
amendment
Wisconsin (May 16, 1911)
New York (July 12, 1911)
Arizona (April 3, 1912)
Minnesota (June 11, 1912)
Louisiana (June 28, 1912)
West Virginia (January 31, 1913)
New Mexico (February 3, 1913)
Ratification (by the requisite thirty-six states) was completed on
February 3, 1913 with the ratification by New Mexico. The amendment
was subsequently ratified by the following states, bringing the total
number of ratifying states to forty-two of the forty-eight then
existing:

37. Delaware (February 3, 1913)
38. Wyoming (February 3, 1913)
39. New Jersey (February 4, 1913)
40. Vermont (February 19, 1913)
41. Massachusetts (March 4, 1913)
42. New Hampshire (March 7, 1913), after rejecting the amendment on
March 2, 1911
The following states rejected the amendment without ever subsequently
ratifying it:

Connecticut
Florida (rejected the amendment after it had already been ratified by
three-fourths of the states)
Rhode Island
Utah
The following states never took up the proposed amendment:

Pennsylvania
Virginia

"Charles Momsen" wrote in news:2ammq7.a8o.17.1
@news.alt.net:

According to the United States Government Printing Office, the
following states ratified the amendment:


See, there's the little problem. The states that DID ratify the amendment
ratified a CHANGED amendment, not the original one the banker class wrote.

But, when they got back to Washington, it was "certified" that they
ratified the original document, which simply ISN'T, and never was, true.

As the ratification was fraudulent, so was the Amendment.