[Technogeeb]

No. You're wrong again

No, you've just decided to start lying again.

BTW, In light of information recently posted to this thread at post 962 and 969 showing that it is not a flaw I have moved your $150,000 HHS poverty level assertion back to where it belongs in the tinfoil-hat section and also placed that back with your accumulated dishonesties

The facts remain that it is indeed a flaw in the system, and the arguments to the contrary (as well stated as they have been by ancient_geezer) are still invalid. Geezer insists that existing laws would prevent such manipulation of the poverty levels. But a defacto examination of recent history (the past decade) shows that the bureaucracies do indeed have the ability to manipulate those numbers (because even they admitted that they have done so) and that there is no real legal consequences in doing so. Until you can show me a picture of Robert Reich in prison (or indeed, suffering any punishment whatsoever) for committing the "crime" to which he confessed (May 26, 2001, New York Times), then the argument that the existing legal constraints are adequate is nonsense.

[Zon]

Until you can show me a picture of Robert Reich in prison (or indeed, suffering any punishment whatsoever) for committing the "crime" to which he confessed (May 26, 2001, New York Times), then the argument that the existing legal constraints are adequate is nonsense.

Yada, yada yada. Tis such folly you have spun.

Violation of almost every law has occurred several times. Some of those violations have been successfully prosecuted and some have failed in prosecution. Only the disingenuous person or dishonest person or irrational person would suggest that a law could guarantee absolute compliance to the law, or that a 100% rate of successful prosecution could guarantee absolute compliance to the law, or one specific successful prosecution could guarantee absolute compliance to the law or set  the standard for what does or does not constitute effective/adequate law. Thanks. //// /