[Technogeeb]

Thank you for clarifying your failed character development

Thank you for identifying that you are a liar. When you realized that you couldn't debate the subject matter honestly, you've switched to personal attacks (starting several posts ago, but I had hoped it was just a temporary failing of yours). When I point out very real flaws (and massively fatal) in the system, you dismiss them as "hyperbole" without even bothering to analyze those flaws.

Here's the proof in our discussion:

And the proof that you are intellectually dishonest. You quote a portion of the mechanism that SEEMS to prevent the flaw in the system. In fact it does nothing of the sort and provides the mechanism for perversion of the system.

You don't work. Your brain is steeped in irrationality

I'm not the one refusing to admit that a system that gives handouts to every household in the US from the government treasury is socialism, and that a system which allows a single, unelected bureaucrat to adjust those values to whatever level he desires is fundamentally flawed.

and has rendered you ineffective. According to your "logic" they can do whatever they want

That's because, under your proposed system, they can do exactly that when it comes to the amount of the government handout. You show this calculation based on proverty level, but are either ignorant (or deliberately deceptive) of the fact that the same administration can modify the value of this calculation merely by changing the value of the poverty level. And since that requires nothing more than the secretary publishing the new value in the Federal Register, your system, once passed, allows a single individual (and an unelected one at that) the ability to convert the economy of the United States into a communistic one. They can choose to make those payouts as large as they want. Far from providing proof of a mechanism to prevent such a perversion of the system, your quote on the "mechanism" shows that it is instead the critical flaw itself.

[Zon]

You demonstrated your dishonesty and intent to deceive the reader. Thus rendering yourself not to be trusted or respected because you disrespect the reader. You probably think you can mislead and try to deceive the reader and that they should just comply with you and answer your questions or take you seriously. You're a joke -- you're clueless. You deserve no person's attention in a discussion. Scorn. That's what you deserve.

[ancient_geezer]

the same administration can modify the value of this calculation merely by changing the value of the poverty level. And since that requires nothing more than the secretary publishing the new value in the Federal Register, your system, once passed, allows a single individual (and an unelected one at that) the ability to convert the economy of the United States into a communistic one.

You have stepped beyond the bounds of any rational discussion.

I suggest you straighten your tinhat abit, them spycontrol waves are leaking in around the edges.

Might I suggest something abit more protective, in the way of shielding out them ray blasts from satellites, black helicopters, and secret CIA radio mind control weapons?

Complete protection in todays spy wave environment, includes portable grounding prod displayed with the full protection tinhat suit. Guaranteed protection against all forms of satellite and ground based emissions.

---

The review for publication in the Federal Register is extensive with public and congressional input required with presidential review authorization, a process established by statutory law, not the mere fiat of an individual. I would suggest you tone your rhetoric down before you make even more of a fool of yourself than you have already.

The system you are making your statements about is the current one in place and the NRST changes nothing about it. By your reasoning , the EITC of the income/payroll tax system should have already done under the control of liberal congresses and presidents across the last 40 years, what you claim the NRST will do to the nation with an FCA.

The reasoning is flawed in concept as well as being the grossest sort of hyperbole.