Ask a question

Why Would Someone With The Department Of State Use The Phrase

Can someone explain what the phrase "pay their fair share of taxes" means?

Today, income redistribution occurs in some form in most democratic countries. In a progressive income tax system, a high income earner will pay a higher tax rate than a low income earner. The difference between the Gini index for an income distribution before taxation and the Gini index after taxation is an indicator for the effects of such taxation. Property redistribution is a term applied to various policies involving taxation or nationalization of property, or of regulations ordering owners to make their property available to others. Public programs and policy measures involving redistribution of property include eminent domain, land reform, inheritance tax and certain provisions found in family law. Two common types of governmental redistribution of wealth are subsidies and vouchers (such as food stamps). These programs are funded through general taxation, but disproportionately benefit the poor, who pay fewer or no taxes. While the persons receiving redistributions from such programs may prefer to be directly given cash, these programs may be more palatable to society, as it gives society some measure of control over how the funds are spent.[2] See Figure 1 for an example of how a subsidy for a good (Good Y in the figure) will increase the amount of the subsidized good purchased by a greater portion than it increases the amount of the non-subsidized good purchased (Good X), as a result of the substitution effect. *added footnote: Vouchers don't increase even if cost of living does. Ryan's voucher for healthcare idea is flawed in that it'll stop medicare for the recepient and when the private ins. cost increases (it does annually), the voucher doesn't and you are stuck with paying the difference/increased amount. Obama has been saying all along the wealthy should pay more taxes, to boost the economy in this.

U.S. Department of State sent this message to that i win a DV lottery. Need to verify this.?

SCAM - the US Embassy in London actually has THREE separate warnings about this exact scam on their website in case you didn't believe the other two. One has already been linked above, here are the other two pages
http://london.usembassy.gov/fraud.html
http://london.usembassy.gov/immigrant-vi...

Report this to the FBIs IC3 division http://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx

If enough people report it hopefully the FBI can put a stop to these scammers

Can those who say the phrase, "Separation of Church and State" isn't in the U.S. Constitution, show me where?

For all those who think that the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."
— from the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

"... no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
— from Article VI of the U.S. Constitution

"The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."
— from The Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11, written during the administration of President George Washington, signed by President John Adams, and unanimously approved by the Senate in 1797

Is "separation of place" the phrase that I need in this context?

Try this instead.......

In an effort to offer the utmost in privacy & security, separate living quarters are provided for both men and women. This separation not only prevents any possible gender-based sexual violence but, it also takes into consideration possible cultural needs of the residents.

How many Americans actually believe the phrase "separation of church and state"?

I don't think many believe it is a Verbatim quote, but that the concept is contained in the Constitution.

So many conservatives talk like the founders were demigods and their opinions and intentions are Haven sent, yet Jefferson's Danbury Baptist Association clearly demonstrates that the "wall of separation between church and state" was the intent. I know that many people don' know the origin of the phrase but they certainly understand the concept.

You can listen to revisionist like David Barton, who's last book, "The Jefferson Lies, " was so full of inaccuracies that publisher withdrew it from publication. He incorrectly claims that the founders intended to form a christian nation, but that is nonsense. He also claims that the phrase refers to keeping the government out of religion but not religion out of the government, his is also a lie told by revisionists. The majority of the founders were men of the enlightenment.

Thomas Paine, the author of Common Sense and an inspiration to the country at the time later wrote, "I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church. All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."

He was not a christian.

Why do atheists always use “Separation of church and state” But it isn’t even in the U.S. Constitution?

A lot of folk misunderstand the verbiage of the First Amendment. One of the things often bandied about is the "freedom of speech". Here is the actual text:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Now as to separation of church and state, "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" is the key phrase. The government may not do anything that has a chilling effect on the practice of any religion. The only place I see that church and state may combine is a political candidate who is a minister telling you to vote for him because God wants it. The minister is not violating the Constitution though he may be displaying arrogance before God from all eternity to all eternity (but the United States doesn't have any laws about that. God can take care Himself and those who violate His law, so there is no need for temporal law on the matter.).

Freedom of speech is often cited here as well. People forget that the Constitutional guarantee restricts the government and not private concerns such as Yahoo. There are circumstances where private operations violate the Constitution with consequence, such as the RIAA threatening to use the Digital MIllenium Copyright Act to prevent Professor Edward Felton from presenting a paper at a colloquim on cryptology. Eventually, that one will reach the courts and it is possible that the RIAA will be slapped down and even that enforcement of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act will be barred.

So the government is in a position where it is violating its own authorizing document to condone the practice of religion in public schools, for example, because necessarily, it cannot be non-denominational and therefore prohibits the free exercise of some religion by favoring others. That is, in essence, a separation of church and state.

I think one must be a very ignorant sort of person if you believe the phrase "It's OK to be white" is racist.For many years I have been a political activist, and trainer in the field of racial equality, have held senior local government posts monitoring and promoting diversity etc. I am very familiar with the published analyses in this field. I have for 19 years been lecturing at university about it to degree level.I’ve never heard such an accusation in the UK (as mentioned in the question.) Is it an American thing?By that analogy with ‘race’ it’s homophobic to state that you are heterosexual and to feel OK with that.Everyone has the right to be who they are. A white person does not choose their colouring any more than a black person chooses theirs. It’s how you were born.Now what you do in life, that’s a different story. You can chose to oppose racism or not. (Similarly as a heterosexual you can choose to oppose homophobia, and as a man choose to oppose sexism etc.)We judge people by their actions (more than their words alone) and not by their given identity.Yes, the public understanding of racism is superficial to say the least but people can’t be so simple minded that they fail to see that not actively opposing racism, means because of such inaction, whatever discriminatory practices that operate within society, will continue.As Howard Zinn once wrote: “You can’t be neutral on a moving train.” Howard Zinn - WikipediaThe other phrase that springs to mind when I think about this whole matter is : “In the land of the blind, a one eyed man is king.” Historically SpeakingIn this matter, an appreciation of complexity and subtlety is required.

POLL: Do people in your town/state/area use certain phrases that people from other areas don't understand?

Being a gen u wine carolina hillbilly, I've heerd a few:

Finer ‘n frog hair
Fuller n' a tick at a blood bank
You’re ‘bout as handy as **** on a boar hog
One er t’other -
skeerdy cat
So dull he couldn't cut hot butter with a knife
Crazier than a chicken with its head cut off
Scarce as hen’s teeth
Tougher than a one-eared alley cat
One brick shy of a load
His elevator is hung in the basement
Ran like a scaled dog
Dumber ‘n a box of rocks
Rougher ‘n a cob
Purtier than a speckled pup
Crookeder than a dog's hind leg
Plumb tuckered out
Silly as a goose
As loose as a goose
Rode hard and put up wet
Three sheets in the wind (drunk)
Higher than a Georgia pine (drunk)
All over him like a cheap suit
"Can't” never could do nothin
That would gag a buzzard on a gut wagon
Rode hard and put up wet
Higher than a Georgia pine (drunk)
All over him like white on rice
He's as country as cornflakes
She's so stuck up, she'd drown in a rainstorm
It's so dry, the trees are bribing the dogs
My cow died last night so I don't need your bull
He’s older ’n dirt
He's a waste of good skin
Uglier’n a redheaded stepchild
When it ain't rain'n the roof don't leak
Uglier 'n homemade sin
Wilder 'n a buck
Meaner 'n uh stripped rattlesnake
Flatter 'n a flitter
Loaded to the gills - drunk
Like a fish out of water -
He'd fight a rattler and give him the first bite
He's so crooked, he could swaller nails an' spit out screws
Drier than cracker juice
He was so crooked they had to screw him into the coffin

First a quote, then a somewhat related short story.   ―     Dave Ramsey-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The story of the investment banker and the fishermanAn American investment banker was at the pier of a small coastal Greek village when a small boat with just one fisherman docked. Inside the small boat were several large yellow fin tuna.The American complimented the Greek on the quality of his fish and asked, "How long does it take to catch them?" The Greek replied: "Only a little while."The American then asked why didn't he stay out longer and catch more fish? The Greek said he had enough to support his family's immediate needs. The American then asked, "But what do you do with the rest of your time?"The Greek fisherman said, "I sleep late, fish a little, play with my children, take siesta with my wife, Maria, stroll into the village each evening where I sip wine and play cards with my friends, I have a full and busy life."The American scoffed, "I am a Harvard MBA and could help you. You should spend more time fishing and with the proceeds, buy a bigger boat with the proceeds from the bigger boat you could buy several boats, eventually you would have a fleet of fishing boats.Instead of selling your catch to a middleman you would sell directly to the processor, eventually opening your own cannery. You would control the product, processing and distribution.You would need to leave this small coastal fishing village and move to Athens, then London and eventually New York where you will run your expanding enterprise."The Greek fisherman asked, "But, how long will this all take?" To which the American replied, "15-25 years.""But what then?" The American laughed and said that's the best part. "When the time is right you would announce an IPO and sell your company stock to the public and become very rich, you would make millions.""Millions ... Then what?" The American said, "Then you would retire. Move to a small coastal fishing village where you would sleep late, fish a little, play with your kids, take siesta with your wife, stroll to the village in the evenings where you could sip wine and play cards with your friends."

Using the social-security number as an identifier is a convenience. The US has no national identity card; not everyone has a passport; not everyone has a driver’s license. That means that matching a record, for example a medical record, to a person is not an easy task because names and dates of birth are not unique. The SSN is supposed to be unique (and usually is).I worked on a data system for the sexually-transmitted disease treatment program for a large metropolitan health department. When I started they had two large clinics with separate record systems. Patients would visit one or the other, or both clinics. The job was to match all the records up into one integrated system. The problem there was that some of these patients didn’t want records their matched, and they would use a different SSN (sometimes incrementing the number by 1) each visit and slightly different addresses each visit. It was a mess. If we had reliable SSN data, those patients could have been served better.In Virginia a SSN is required for voter registration unless you declare you don’t have one. They are up front about the reason, it is so that they have a unique identifier to make sure you’re not registered in two different places.Anyhow, that why they do it.