I say yes, you say no, OR People are Strange

Otter-I just sent you a PM and it said it was sent successfully. I assume I'm on ignore(Why am I posting this??? She can't see this if I'm truly on ignore.....) 

Mary 

OK-I see what happens. When I go to Otter's profile, I do not have the option to send her a PM. I was wondering how people on the "other site" knew I had them on ignore. Apparently, they must have tried to send me PMs.

"That Yram AL chick"  

That's interesting .. so if you have someone on ignore, the person doesn't have the capability to send you a PM.  I guess that's a good way to find out if someone has you on ignore.

I was wondering how that worked ... good detective work Otter and Mary!

Bren

I've ruffled a few feathers in the past of those who post on the other site. I've been able to figure out who they are here, and who they are there. I've put them all on ignore here because of PMs I was getting from them. 

Now I know how they know "that YramAL chick" has them ignore. Thanks, Otter. I'm done going over there. It's like a trainwreck-it's hard to stay away, but I will. 

Mary 

blue, you're killin' me with those jokes!  ROTFL!!!

otter

[ETA:  YramAL, I just took you off "ignore".  Verrrry interesting, eh?  Can't even try to send a PM because the link's not available... I've lost the link to the "other site", so I'm not even tempted to go there.  Just as well, I think.  Last time I stopped by, they were saying horrible things and mocking people I really care about.  Made me so mad, I had to turn off my computer before it overheated.]

Because ignorance gives me a stomach ache, I just want to fully clarify something. The current debate in our nation's capital about taxes, deficits, spending, etc. ONLY involves federal income tax. You also may income taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, and other fees at the state and local level. These have nothing to do with the current political crisis. Below is the current tax rate table:

Tax Bracket             Single                     Married Filing Jointly        Head of Household
10% Bracket        $0 - $8,500                             $0 - $17,000           $0 - $12,150
15% Bracket     $8,500 - $34,500                  $17,000 - $69,000      $12,150 - $46,250
25% Bracket     $34,500 - $83,600                 $69,000 - $139,350    $46,250 - $119,400
28% Bracket     $83,600 - $174,400              $139,350 - $212,300   $119,400 - $193,350
33% Bracket     $174,400 - $379,150            $212,300 - $379,150    $193,350 - $379,150
35% Bracket         $379,150+                            $379,150+                  $379,150+

No one in the US is paying more than 35% on any of their income and that is only on the income they have over 379,150. It works like this -- lets take single as an example, on the first $8500 after all deductions and exemptions, you pay 10% or max $850. On income between $8500 and $34000 you pay 15%. and so forth. AND this is only on Earned Income. If you have investment income the rate varies between 15% and 28% depending on a number of factors.

For historical perspective, the highest tax bracket in the 1950s was 91%. In the 60s, 70s, and early 80s was 50%. Under Bill Clinton it dropped to 39%. Remember these are the rates that the very tippy top of income earners pay.

We in the US are not being overtaxed by our federal government (which is charged with providing for our defense and our common welfare). Let us not forget that at the end of the Clinton administration the US actually ran a budget surplus. That is gone now due to two unfunded (and illegal) wars and the Bush tax cuts, which primarily have benefited the wealthiest 2% in our country (and if you fall in their, God bless you, but the reality is that the rest of us with NEVER be that rich no matter how hard we try, work, etc.)

Thank you. My stomach feels better now. Shirley, you probably talk to many more conservative folks than I do, could you clarify this for them? Hannity does not pay anywhere near 50% of his income in federal taxes and that is the subject of the current fiscal crisis. The state crises are another matter and need to be dealt with as well, but let's not get the two confused.

C-S, nooooooo!!!  Say it ain't so!  Sheesh.  More turf wars, yes?

Thank you, Revkat.

No wars -  will not have my screen name as the original post on a thread that becomes about chemotherapy bashing and "miracle cures."  I don't want to be around that kind of posting.  And if I used the ignore button on that thread, I wouldn't be able to see what was being said.

SO, Now I CAN use the ignore button.  Kind of funny, for a thread started by one person, t become a thread in which only that person was posting - you'd think a person would wise up as to what is and isn't appropriate.  

No turf - I don't have a "stake" in what happens to BC.org. Sorry.  I really put a lot of effort into trying to keep that thread about healing - but someone just couldn't stand not being the focus

Athena

the thread is still going - just without my participation.  I changed the OP, don't want to be associated with anything as dangerous as "chemotherapy bashing" and "miracle cures."  A certain person, who we don't need to name, expecially if she starts posting here, was the "last one standing" on the thread she started, the only person posting there, so she had the mods lock it.  That person has a need for attention that is CRUSHING to any kind of genuine communication.  I am very happy to have tried.  I don't need the hassle, really, too much effort for too little.

A note about mention of that other web site.

First a disclaimer: I visited it once about 6-8 months ago and read about ten posts. I visited it again about a month ago (roughly - don't remember) and read another ten.

 Other than that, I haven't wanted to visit or even mention it. Why. For several reasons, mostly, though, because the BCO moderators have asked us not to. The animosity puts BCO in a very awkward position. The mods have, in the past, asked us to refrain from mentioning it. IMO it's also a good idea to try to stop reading (not saying we don't all have some MTF syndrome) unless your interest is solely for the stated purpose - for support and information re: breast cancer. I have no idea who owns that site or anything about it, nor do I want any PMs with explanations. However, I am sure that many people who visit that site and post to it, were very, very offended when it was said there that a Stage IV sister was leeching off the public dole (not exact phrasing) by collecting Social Security. I was upset when I read that, and I'm sure any decent human being who abhors cruelty, ignorance and misrepresentation loathes that too. So, in full disclosure, I am guessing that that was behind one comment Enjoyful made today (and to which I responded).

I really don't care about political leanings in the end. Personal likes and dislikes are also part of life.

But calling someone with incurable cancer out for receiving assistance that she has not only paid for but needs should be in everybody's book of indecent. I prefer pornography to a statement like that.

Ans so, for the sake of BCO mods who have made the request and the inimitable George Carlin, who said "It's bad for you" and for the many breast cancer patients who post and depend for support and information on BOTH sites, could we not mention or allude to the other site in public? Sometimes I have no idea what's going on, and then I sort of have to guess, and you wonder who'se baiting whom, when how, etc...

There's enough detective work needed to figure out what is going on here half the time.  

Off my soapbox.

Blue, more jokes, please.... 

(((Sunflowers)))

Sorry. I guess I'm feeling unusually conciliatory tonight. (What's with that???)  As most of you know, I'm the queen of evidence-based claims. It sickens me to read posts in which people promote ingestion or injection of highly toxic stuff (e.g., "mistletoe") as an alternative to conventional stuff they consider too toxic. I mean, what sane person would give herself several coffee enemas a day and think she was doing her body any good?  How is that natural???

I lose it when someone promotes some bizarre treatment and then, when asked how it works, describes a pathway that only shows how little the person understands about biology.  I won't cite examples here, because my post would be flagged as insulting.  All you need to do is wander over to you-know-where and browse a little.  Try reading some of the recent posts on that poor thread C-S was trying to maintain. It's sad that people can be so ... um, (how to be nice with this?) ... okay, naîve, about how the human body really works.  Maybe they accidentally slept through 9th grade health class?...  (Darn. I probably shouldn't have said that.)

I get really tired of those make-believe explanations.  They sound so creative, though, that some readers believe them -- especially when they're accompanied by the title and author of a self-published book as the "source".  Sheesh.  I'm glad conventional medicine has a stronger foundation in science than that stuff does.

[I guess I'm not feeling so conciliatory any more.]

otter

on the tax chart, thank you.  am I correct in thinking that is not gross income but adjusted gross--after you do various sorts of deductions?  Anyrate between above the line and below the line deductions, what I pay in taxes doesn't cover one policeperson's training or salary. . . .

WhiteRabbit I hear you!  Blame the poor bunnies!!!! (in my corner of the universe, its blame the slugs. . . .)  You people are clearly biased against bunnies!!!!! Boohiss!!!!     besides, bunnies are so tasty, especially when they've been dining on fresh veggies and herbs!

Blue  I love that joke and all its variations including the man stuck on top of his house after the flood. . . .

I have to say, the trend towards meaness in the world is something I just don't get.   It takes so much energy to write or even think of snippy comments.  And the name calling---my goodness, didn't we all learn not to do that when we got out of elementary school or middle school at the latest?  Whats the point? 

I shall drink a toast to Ms. Betty Ford tonight and the lost ability to be civil even when we disagree. . . .