Is the health care reform racist?

[BRHornet45]

its funny how Pelosi allowed the Botox industry off the hook. people forget that originally Reid had a 5% tax on botox, but thanks to the corrupt lobbyist and pharmaceutical companies they were able to get off the hook. not to mention the fact that Pelosi is obviously a huge fan of botox. the reason they were excluded is because they claimed it was discriminating towards older white women .... hmmm so let me get this straight ... taxing botox is discriminating towards older white women, so they replace it with a 10% tax on the indoor tanning industry? who the do they think uses tanning beds!? lol ...

It is estimated that the 5% tax on botox would have brought in over $5.8 billion over 10 years. now they estimate that the 10% tax on indoor tanning will only bring in $2.7 billion over the next 10 years. Regardless if you use tanning beds or not you can't deny the facts. This is a VERY racist tax aimed at small business owners. Also its funny to me how they act as if the indoor tanning industry is a huge business to begin with ... all the ones that I see look like hole in the wall small businesses lol. Once again the small business owners will foot the bill. what's next? a tax for beach visitors?

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

The only thing re ed is your claim that I said tanning beds don't emit UV. Where did I say that?

If tanning beds emit UV rays how on god's green Earth do they protect against UV rays.

Don't call me the re when you're the one claiming I said tanning beds don't emit UV radiation.

This is coming from the person who claims tanning beds protect against the very thing they emit.

I said tanning protects against UV rays. Which it does. Medical fact.

Nowhere in that article you posted does it say tanning beds protect against UV rays, and it's anywhere from a medical fact. I'll never post again if you can find a credible medical source that says tanning beds "protect you from UV rays".

[quote=whottt;4178460]It's called limited exposure and is very similar to the concept behind just about every vaccine there is you idiot.

And of course I looked this up. I did it before I made the post. Here you go you stupid ing bag:

http://www.womentowomen.com/healthyn...nningbeds.aspx

Can tanning beds offer the same health benefits as sunshine? Specifically, are tanning booths a safe source of vitamin D? Tanning salons might like you to think so, but don’t be fooled. Indoor tanning is not an advisable source of vitamin D. The reason lies in the characteristics of ultraviolet light rays, and how these rays affect the body.

This site specifically says "don't be fooled" by tanning salons wanting you to think they are a good source of vitamin C. More or less, the site says tanning salons don't do for your health. Also, regarding your racist claim:

Remember, 15–20 minutes of sunshine a day, several times per week, provides sufficient UVB absorption for most Caucasians to optimize their vitamin D levels; however, the darker your skin, the more time you need.

So African American people need more exposure to sunlight to attain proper vitamin D levels, so if tanning beds were to ever be used for vitamin D purposes, black people would use them just as much, if not more, than white people.

That explains the negatives as well as the positives and how the existing negatives can be turned into even greater positives.

You're welcome, re .

Nowhere does it give any positive reasons for sun tanning. The main point was to dispute the claim tanning beds are a good source of vitamin D.

[whottt]

It's like how health care reform CAN be good for you. Does have some health benefits.

Sure. It can also be a health tax, which can lead to stress, which most decidedly is not good for you.

Medical fact on stress, and stress is in the eye of the beholder.

I assume you meant an 8oz glass, but since you never stipulated the amount of water in my glass, I would win based on my one drop glass.

I guess it's just in your character to cheat.

I don't guess you're bright enough to realize I would combat that by just smoking a smaller cigarette since I didn't stipulate the size of the cigarette.

Let's flip the bet though. How about you go without water and I go without cigarettes and let's see who goes to the hospital first.

Why should we flip it, I'm not the one operating under the chilkdlike absolute thought delusion that things are simply good or bad. Period. Always.

You are.


The same chromosomal shortage that lead to you being incapable of grasping the difference between health benefits and good for you is why you fail to see that is an incomparably stupid bet that has basically nothing to do with your inability to grasp simple concepts or freeing you from childlike conceptualizing of absolutes.

Water is considered good for you, therefore by your absolute logic it always good for you and there are no negatives to consuming it. Smoking is bad for you, therefore it is always bad for you and there are no postives to it.

This is the oversimplistic and chidlike stupid frame reference you operate under, not I.

Since I believe pretty much everything has positives and negatives I would prove nothing I claim by going without water unless I had drunk too much of it or it was sewage or something like that.

Otoh, by you drinking water and me smoking until one of us is hospitalized, you would indeed learn that good for you is not an absolute statement and you would no longer ask stupid non-absolute questions expecting absolute answers. All the while mistaking it for some sort of challenging intellecual exercise.

Water isn't straight up good for you according to whottt. It simply CAN be good for you.

Put your money where your mouth...if water simply good for you, you should be able to win this bet.

Water=Good
Smoking=Bad

Such is the stupid and inaccurate world view of Blake...

I know. Asking if a health benefit is good for you can be a tricky question on a messageboard.

Yes because there are lots of stupid people that don't understand simple answers that a typical 10 year old has the cognitive ability to grasp. And you don't want to them up any worse than fate aleady has by giving them an answer they likely won't understand and apparently that is just about any answer you will give.

There are many such people on message boards, they destroy message boards with their stupidity and migrate to other boards, sticking out like a very sore and stupid thumb

Now you know.

One would hate for that question to come back and bite him in the ass because there is no distinct "true or false" or "yes or no". There is only "it depends on how I need it to fit into my argument."

Maybe so but at least I'm not the guy backing down from my own claims of absolute good for you and bad for you.

That would be you. Backing away from it 100%. Keep backing up and maybe you'll wind up back at SR...where you are no doubt, one of the smart ones.

Which explains so much.

Sadly.

[BRHornet45]

son this isn't about tanning being good or bad for you. everyone has their opinions on that subject. this is about a 10% tax being added to their industry. its simply not fair and is discriminating towards light skin people. why don't they add an additional tax to the fast food industry? that is horrible for you and has done nothing but exploded obesity in the U.S. ... we could argue about this all day long.

[BRHornet45]

oh and since roughly 95% of those who use tanning services are white, then its perfectly ok and not racist.

[whottt]

Supposedly fried chicken is pretty bad for you generally. Maybe they'll put a tax on that. Arbitrarily.

[Blake]

Sure. It can also be a health tax, which can lead to stress, which most decidedly is not good for you.

Medical fact on stress, and stress is in the eye of the beholder.

But it can also lead to health benefits.

I guess it's just in your character to cheat.

Cheating?

I use the rules given to the fullest extent. It's not my fault your rules failed you.

I don't guess you're bright enough to realize I would combat that by just smoking a smaller cigarette since I didn't stipulate the size of the cigarette.

Based on the surgeon general stating that there really is no safe amount of cigarette smoke, I'd still lay odds that you will be in the hospital sooner, even if it takes a few more decades to accomplish that feat.

I don't guess you're bright enough to realize you're bet is now basically a waste of time.......unless you actually enjoy rolling up the car windows and having yourself a smoke in.

Why should we flip it, I'm not the one operating under the chilkdlike absolute thought delusion that things are simply good or bad. Period. Always.

You are.

I am not and I have not said I believe in absolutes.

You are absolutely a liar though.

The same chromosomal shortage that lead to you being incapable of grasping the difference between health benefits and good for you is why you fail to see that is an incomparably stupid bet that has basically nothing to do with your inability to grasp simple concepts or freeing you from childlike conceptualizing of absolutes.

see above.

Water is considered good for you, therefore by your absolute logic it always good for you and there are no negatives to consuming it. Smoking is bad for you, therefore it is always bad for you and there are no postives to it.

I on our educational system a lot, but I'm not ting on it as much as you currently are.

Are you seriously trying to say that is my logic?

This is the oversimplistic and chidlike stupid frame reference you operate under, not I.

Since I believe pretty much everything has positives and negatives I would prove nothing I claim by going without water unless I had drunk too much of it or it was sewage or something like that.

Otoh, by you drinking water and me smoking until one of us is hospitalized, you would indeed learn that good for you is not an absolute statement and you would no longer ask stupid non-absolute questions expecting absolute answers. All the while mistaking it for some sort of challenging intellecual exercise.





Put your money where your mouth...if water simply good for you, you should be able to win this bet.

Water=Good
Smoking=Bad

Such is the stupid and inaccurate world view of Blake...

this is the horribly overreaching generalizing messageboard view of whottt

Yes because there are lots of stupid people that don't understand simple answers that a typical 10 year old has the cognitive ability to grasp. And you don't want to them up any worse than fate aleady has by giving them an answer they likely won't understand and apparently that is just about any answer you will give.

There are many such people on message boards, they destroy message boards with their stupidity and migrate to other boards, sticking out like a very sore and stupid thumb

Now you know.

There's also an unspoken level of common sense that water at some point can be too much to consume and that 2+2=4.

You are trying to twist this into me not knowing that 2+2=4 when it's you that's simply playing a semantics game so that everything will fit into your argument or that you try to leave yourself a back door to slip out of.

Common sense and common posting decency on a messageboard says that when a poster says "water is good for you" that we all know that there's a limit to the goodness.

You're a dooshbag for taking it to the extreme limits of absoluteness.

Maybe so but at least I'm not the guy backing down from my own claims of absolute good for you and bad for you.

That would be you. Backing away from it 100%. Keep backing up and maybe you'll wind up back at SR...where you are no doubt, one of the smart ones.

Which explains so much.

Sadly.

I'm not backing away from any claims. Water really CAN be good for you. There CAN be smart posters at SR. There CAN be ridiculous posters here.

[Blake]

oh and since roughly 95% of those who use tanning services are white, then its perfectly ok and not racist.

I'd agree that the botox people had more lobby power, but I don't see it as racist.

Whose idea was it to put the tanning tax in to begin with?

[BRHornet45]

I'd agree that the botox people had more lobby power, but I don't see it as racist.

Whose idea was it to put the tanning tax in to begin with?

Harry Reid and Obama ...

oh and the botox industry OF COURSE had people lobbying for them son. the pharmaceutical companies would have lost BILLIONS in revenue if they would have got taxed. the tanning industry doesn't have anywhere near the amount of lobbyist fighting for them because it is an industry of small business owners. not rich doctors, hospitals, etc.

[whottt]

*snip*

Nothing personal, I've explained it in the most simple terms possible and even offered to prove it in terms you could understand. I know without reading that too thoroughly that you still don't get it. I've done all I can to help. You don't want help. So there's not any point in any discussion with you.

Hopefully you'll seek help traversing the maze of the pre-analytical world to the light that lies beyond the object permanence stage, and hopefully they'll be able to help you.


I cannot. And I accept that.

Comon sense

sense is never common in a dicussion with you. I'm sorry.

[Blake]

Harry Reid and Obama ...

so you are saying Harry Reid is racist against whites?

[Blake]

*snip*

Nothing personal, I've explained it in the most simple terms possible and even offered to prove it in terms you could understand. I know without reading that too thoroughly that you still don't get it. I've done all I can to help. You don't want help. So there's not any point in any discussion with you.

Hopefully you'll seek help traversing the maze of the pre-analytical world to the light that lies beyond the object permanence stage, and hopefully they'll be able to help you.

You want to play semantics games so that you have an out for your arguments and can claim "I never 100% said that".....just as you have done in this thread and others.

I get it perfectly.

sense is never common in a dicussion with you. I'm sorry.

Obviously you fail at deciphering simple phrases such as "water is good for you."

I'm sorry I actually had to explain it to you as everyone else but you seems to get it.

[whottt]

[Blake]

[whottt]

[Blake]

[whottt]

.

[Blake]

.

..

[whottt]

www.spursreport.com

[Blake]

www.spursreport.com

is this type of communication easier for you to handle than what you'd find at SR?

[ElNono]

I said tanning protects against UV rays. Which it does. Medical fact.

[Trainwreck2100]

if your skin is already burned then you can't get double burned? The logic is sound

[ElNono]

if your skin is already burned then you can't get double burned? The logic is sound

File it under the popular myths category:
What You Know About Tanning May Not Be True

Tanning protects your skin.
Most people believe that tanning protects you from sunburn. This is based on the explanation that tanning does not allow the UV rays to pass through the skin and acts as natural protection against sunburn. However, tanned skin does not have any external protective layer to protect you from UV rays. Understand that tanned skin is just darkened skin and cannot protect your skin in anyway.

[Blake]

File it under the popular myths category:
What You Know About Tanning May Not Be True

Tanning protects your skin.
Most people believe that tanning protects you from sunburn. This is based on the explanation that tanning does not allow the UV rays to pass through the skin and acts as natural protection against sunburn. However, tanned skin does not have any external protective layer to protect you from UV rays. Understand that tanned skin is just darkened skin and cannot protect your skin in anyway.

no, whottt said it's a medical fact that tanning CAN protect against UV rays......right, whottt?

[ElNono]

no, whottt said it's a medical fact that tanning CAN protect against UV rays......right, whottt?

We've all been wrong here or there. Let it go, it's not a big deal.

About the tax, well, it's not the first industry that gets taxed for providing a service/product that's deemed unhealthy. I believe it won't be the last either.
As a former smoker, I can tell you that using monetary penalties as deterrent didn't really work in my case. I eventually stopped for different reasons.