lol

>> ^gwiz665:

I know. It's like, some women think I'm only a penis, and it hurts, you know..?
>> ^bareboards2:
Has anyone heard the story about the SNL skit from the Dan Akroyd/Gilda Radner days where they reversed the roles? The women played the construction workers and Dan played a man walking by the construction site wearing shorts.
It was just a skit, but he ended up deeply upset by it.
All you guys who think this is nothing, just imagine... just imagine... if all you EVER saw of male images was young, taut muscled, and passive. No fighter jocks. No big funny guys with beer bellies. No firemen. Just... pretty body parts.
After you have spent ten minutes thinking about that, really thinking about it, then you can talk.
Until then, just shut the fuck up already. You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

I am seriously enjoying your embrace of the Penis-dom in some of your posts.

I need a good laugh.

In reply to this comment by gwiz665:
I know. It's like, some women think I'm only a penis, and it hurts, you know..?

>> ^bareboards2:

Has anyone heard the story about the SNL skit from the Dan Akroyd/Gilda Radner days where they reversed the roles? The women played the construction workers and Dan played a man walking by the construction site wearing shorts.
It was just a skit, but he ended up deeply upset by it.
All you guys who think this is nothing, just imagine... just imagine... if all you EVER saw of male images was young, taut muscled, and passive. No fighter jocks. No big funny guys with beer bellies. No firemen. Just... pretty body parts.
After you have spent ten minutes thinking about that, really thinking about it, then you can talk.
Until then, just shut the fuck up already. You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

I know. It's like, some women think I'm only a penis, and it hurts, you know..?

>> ^bareboards2:

Has anyone heard the story about the SNL skit from the Dan Akroyd/Gilda Radner days where they reversed the roles? The women played the construction workers and Dan played a man walking by the construction site wearing shorts.
It was just a skit, but he ended up deeply upset by it.
All you guys who think this is nothing, just imagine... just imagine... if all you EVER saw of male images was young, taut muscled, and passive. No fighter jocks. No big funny guys with beer bellies. No firemen. Just... pretty body parts.
After you have spent ten minutes thinking about that, really thinking about it, then you can talk.
Until then, just shut the fuck up already. You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Dude, is it so hard to believe a public employee makes $12,000 a month? That's only $144,000 a year, not $1.4 million. It's possible. Especially since so many groups are unionized in this state.

Remember this video with Councilman Bernard Parks banning fast food in South LA? Well, according to this article from LA Times (you know how right wing they can be), Parks makes $178,789 a year plus "$22,000 a month in city retirement benefits". Plus a police pension of $265,050 being the highest paid police chief in US history. But that's just one councilman and retired police chief in LA.

The entire Los Angeles general fund budget is $6.7billion, and they're projecting a deficit. The police budget's over 1 billion. And check this article out:

Los Angeles could face nearly a $1-billion shortfall by 2010 because of a mammoth bailout needed for the city's employee pension funds, which have seen investments tank in the spiraling national recession, according to a city budget report released Friday.

Sure, they're cutting some jobs, but look at all the new spending and hiring they're doing. On the news right now they're reporting about LA City Council voting to fund a $1.2 billion-development project to build a luxury hotel. And what about the high speed railsystem from San Diego to San Fran? The point is, LA and California spend a lot of money, so why is the $12,000 monthly salary for a fireman too big for you to swallow? Usually there's nothing too big for you to swallow.

Hell, a quick google search could've easily proven my "apocryphal firefighter" is in fact not so questionable. According to this article, "overtime pay for the Los Angeles Fire Department soared 60 percent over the last decade", and "the department's top earner racked up a total of $570,276 in overtime in the last three years, including $206,685 in 2006." And that's just overtime. How are they able to earn so much? Is it because the number of fires magically leapt to historical highs over the last couple of years? Well, according to the article, that sounds unlikely:

Recruits earn overtime for after-hours remedial training "if they feel the need for more time to grasp the skills," a department spokeswoman said.

So, do you now still call bullshit on me, my CPA, and your mom the two of us were fucking when we told each other that story? Or does it seem possible (nay probable!) that maybe the city workers in unions here in LA (and all over California for that matter) are making a very good (and at times great) salary on our tax dollars?

My CPA also told me a story of an architect who got tired of struggling as a small business and having to pay so much in taxes, so he quit the private sector to make more money working for the city. You wanna call BS on my apocryphal architect?

And I do care about the taxes I have to pay. I envy you that you don't. You must've had a great life as a lawyer's son. Always having more than you owe. I wish we all could come from there so we could also take the same sanctimonious positions you do. Only people of privilege seem to say things like, "money isn't everything." As if they scowl at the rest of us for wanting better for ourselves. Now excuse me while I go back to that mom of yours I was fucking when I told you this story.

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
I'm not accusing you of lying, I'm just expressing skepticism since it doesn't line up with either my personal experience, nor with objective analyses of the changes in tax law from 2009 to 2010. Since you don't seem to have any firsthand knowledge about why your taxes might be higher, there's not really any way for us to get to the bottom of the discrepancy in our viewpoints.

I can't say the same about your secondhand hearsay about a supposed fireman who's making six figures. I call bullshit on you, your CPA, and the pig the two of you were fucking when you told each other that story. It's either a total fabrication, or the guy's primary source of income has nothing to do with firefighting.

As for Ireland, Greece, Spain and the UK, they're not in the same boat as the US. They're all engaged in much sterner deficit-reduction policy than the US has adopted or is likely to adopt in the near future. And to answer the question I posed to you, the net result is that they're just making things worse. What on paper should have reduced the budget didn't since it depressed the economy so much, and as a result they're no better off in terms of government debt, and much worse off when it comes to their general economies. Countries who took the liberal path like Canada and Sweeden are in pretty good shape. The US is pretty much splitting the difference, and while we're not getting worse anymore, we're not really recovering either.

I kinda feel sorry for you if you really think taxes are the only thing standing between you and a happy, satisfying life. A 35% raise wouldn't give that to me, nor would even a 350% raise. It'd be nice to have to be sure, but I feel like I've passed the point where even large increases in my income would have a qualitative impact on my overall quality of life. I don't really make all that much in the grand scheme of things either -- far less than your apocryphal firefighter.

I appreciate your candor in admitting that you don't care about wars, or humanitarian crises that happen to other people, just about how much taxes you have to pay and whether people you know make fun of you or not. Most people who feel that way don't have the guts to come right out and say so.

Just a word of advice, but money isn't everything. It can feel like it if you're not able to put food on the table, a roof over your head, or pay your medical bills, but beyond that happiness and satisfaction has a lot more to do with your emotional needs and the relationships you have with the people in your life than much of anything else.

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
Well, I'm certainly not lying. And it was 35% on my adjusted income, or what they call taxable income, I think. And it was in no way over or even in the same ballpark as $373k. Not even close.

I don't own. I rent. It is LA, after all. Buying a home in the city is tough. But I shouldn't be penalized for that, should I? We didn't get married last year, but we're certainly doing it this year. That may help next year, but why punish people who are single? Does that seem fair to you? And why punish those who don't want to work in the public sector or for a corporation? You know, I did employ two freelancers, so I create jobs this year. Shouldn't I be rewarded for that? It just makes zero sense to me.

I don't know why my tax is so high, to be honest. I have a CPA that deals with all of that. I just give him my itemized deductions and the amount I made, and he does the rest.

Yes, Ireland, Greece, Spain and the UK are exactly the same as the US. Bravo. Their EU is part of their problem, but that's an entirely different conversation, isn't it? I like how you bipartisan types take someone's real problems and make a political statement out of them. You know, taxation of this magnitude is not a partisan issue. This affects real people with real lives. Right now in my life, the only thing that stands in the way of me building a better life and the ability for me to pursue my happiness is the government. I owe them every year, and every year it goes up, and every year the Democrats call me a liar. I don't understand that.

Meanwhile, my CPA tells me of some of his clients. The firemen and policemen in LA. One fireman, a captain for a firehouse, makes $12,000 a month, and he'll retire when he's 55, and he'll take home 90% of that for the rest of his life. Good for him. A police captain makes enough to buy a home in Malibu overlooking the water. According to my CPA, he's got one helluva beautiful manicured backyard, too. Good for him. Glad I can pay for it. And you wonder why some of us hate public unions. Because I have to pay for them to retire at the age of 55 and take home a pension for the rest of their lives, yet the small businessmen can't catch a break because we're just middle class. I hear it's a helluva lot easier to just get on welfare and ride that out for a while.

So, you can comeback all you want with "Spain! UK! Greece!" but it means little to people like me, because I don't give a damn about your partisan bullshit, and it's not worth my effort to sit here and point out the many flaws in that argument. I care about how this affects me. The wars, the world affairs, the humanitarian efforts, and whatever else to me is just a distraction. What's important is I shouldn't be raked over the coals, and then have a gaggle of confused statists scratching their heads and point fingers at me as if there was some taxation glitch in the system.

I'm not accusing you of lying, I'm just expressing skepticism since it doesn't line up with either my personal experience, nor with objective analyses of the changes in tax law from 2009 to 2010. Since you don't seem to have any firsthand knowledge about why your taxes might be higher, there's not really any way for us to get to the bottom of the discrepancy in our viewpoints.

I can't say the same about your secondhand hearsay about a supposed fireman who's making six figures. I call bullshit on you, your CPA, and the pig the two of you were fucking when you told each other that story. It's either a total fabrication, or the guy's primary source of income has nothing to do with firefighting.

As for Ireland, Greece, Spain and the UK, they're not in the same boat as the US. They're all engaged in much sterner deficit-reduction policy than the US has adopted or is likely to adopt in the near future. And to answer the question I posed to you, the net result is that they're just making things worse. What on paper should have reduced the budget didn't since it depressed the economy so much, and as a result they're no better off in terms of government debt, and much worse off when it comes to their general economies. Countries who took the liberal path like Canada and Sweeden are in pretty good shape. The US is pretty much splitting the difference, and while we're not getting worse anymore, we're not really recovering either.

I kinda feel sorry for you if you really think taxes are the only thing standing between you and a happy, satisfying life. A 35% raise wouldn't give that to me, nor would even a 350% raise. It'd be nice to have to be sure, but I feel like I've passed the point where even large increases in my income would have a qualitative impact on my overall quality of life. I don't really make all that much in the grand scheme of things either -- far less than your apocryphal firefighter.

I appreciate your candor in admitting that you don't care about wars, or humanitarian crises that happen to other people, just about how much taxes you have to pay and whether people you know make fun of you or not. Most people who feel that way don't have the guts to come right out and say so.

Just a word of advice, but money isn't everything. It can feel like it if you're not able to put food on the table, a roof over your head, or pay your medical bills, but beyond that happiness and satisfaction has a lot more to do with your emotional needs and the relationships you have with the people in your life than much of anything else.

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
Well, I'm certainly not lying. And it was 35% on my adjusted income, or what they call taxable income, I think. And it was in no way over or even in the same ballpark as $373k. Not even close.

I don't own. I rent. It is LA, after all. Buying a home in the city is tough. But I shouldn't be penalized for that, should I? We didn't get married last year, but we're certainly doing it this year. That may help next year, but why punish people who are single? Does that seem fair to you? And why punish those who don't want to work in the public sector or for a corporation? You know, I did employ two freelancers, so I create jobs this year. Shouldn't I be rewarded for that? It just makes zero sense to me.

I don't know why my tax is so high, to be honest. I have a CPA that deals with all of that. I just give him my itemized deductions and the amount I made, and he does the rest.

Yes, Ireland, Greece, Spain and the UK are exactly the same as the US. Bravo. Their EU is part of their problem, but that's an entirely different conversation, isn't it? I like how you bipartisan types take someone's real problems and make a political statement out of them. You know, taxation of this magnitude is not a partisan issue. This affects real people with real lives. Right now in my life, the only thing that stands in the way of me building a better life and the ability for me to pursue my happiness is the government. I owe them every year, and every year it goes up, and every year the Democrats call me a liar. I don't understand that.

Meanwhile, my CPA tells me of some of his clients. The firemen and policemen in LA. One fireman, a captain for a firehouse, makes $12,000 a month, and he'll retire when he's 55, and he'll take home 90% of that for the rest of his life. Good for him. A police captain makes enough to buy a home in Malibu overlooking the water. According to my CPA, he's got one helluva beautiful manicured backyard, too. Good for him. Glad I can pay for it. And you wonder why some of us hate public unions. Because I have to pay for them to retire at the age of 55 and take home a pension for the rest of their lives, yet the small businessmen can't catch a break because we're just middle class. I hear it's a helluva lot easier to just get on welfare and ride that out for a while.

So, you can comeback all you want with "Spain! UK! Greece!" but it means little to people like me, because I don't give a damn about your partisan bullshit, and it's not worth my effort to sit here and point out the many flaws in that argument. I care about how this affects me. The wars, the world affairs, the humanitarian efforts, and whatever else to me is just a distraction. What's important is I shouldn't be raked over the coals, and then have a gaggle of confused statists scratching their heads and point fingers at me as if there was some taxation glitch in the system.

Well, I'm certainly not lying. And it was 35% on my adjusted income, or what they call taxable income, I think. And it was in no way over or even in the same ballpark as $373k. Not even close.

I don't own. I rent. It is LA, after all. Buying a home in the city is tough. But I shouldn't be penalized for that, should I? We didn't get married last year, but we're certainly doing it this year. That may help next year, but why punish people who are single? Does that seem fair to you? And why punish those who don't want to work in the public sector or for a corporation? You know, I did employ two freelancers, so I create jobs this year. Shouldn't I be rewarded for that? It just makes zero sense to me.

I don't know why my tax is so high, to be honest. I have a CPA that deals with all of that. I just give him my itemized deductions and the amount I made, and he does the rest.

Yes, Ireland, Greece, Spain and the UK are exactly the same as the US. Bravo. Their EU is part of their problem, but that's an entirely different conversation, isn't it? I like how you bipartisan types take someone's real problems and make a political statement out of them. You know, taxation of this magnitude is not a partisan issue. This affects real people with real lives. Right now in my life, the only thing that stands in the way of me building a better life and the ability for me to pursue my happiness is the government. I owe them every year, and every year it goes up, and every year the Democrats call me a liar. I don't understand that.

Meanwhile, my CPA tells me of some of his clients. The firemen and policemen in LA. One fireman, a captain for a firehouse, makes $12,000 a month, and he'll retire when he's 55, and he'll take home 90% of that for the rest of his life. Good for him. A police captain makes enough to buy a home in Malibu overlooking the water. According to my CPA, he's got one helluva beautiful manicured backyard, too. Good for him. Glad I can pay for it. And you wonder why some of us hate public unions. Because I have to pay for them to retire at the age of 55 and take home a pension for the rest of their lives, yet the small businessmen can't catch a break because we're just middle class. I hear it's a helluva lot easier to just get on welfare and ride that out for a while.

So, you can comeback all you want with "Spain! UK! Greece!" but it means little to people like me, because I don't give a damn about your partisan bullshit, and it's not worth my effort to sit here and point out the many flaws in that argument. I care about how this affects me. The wars, the world affairs, the humanitarian efforts, and whatever else to me is just a distraction. What's important is I shouldn't be raked over the coals, and then have a gaggle of confused statists scratching their heads and point fingers at me as if there was some taxation glitch in the system.

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
All I can say is I'll have to take your word for it. Maybe you could send me your tax return, and I could figure out what the deal was!

But something's definitely fishy about that, because the top marginal income tax rate is 35%, which means you only get taxed at 35% on income above $373,651, and that's adjusted income, as in after you do all your deductions.

I'd have to whip out a calculator to check what overall % of my income it was when I was all said and done, but mine was more like 12%. Then again I'm pretty much doing most of the normal middle-class stuff that's subsidized (i.e. married, own a home, work for a corporation that provides health insurance, etc.). Only thing missing is the 2.5 kids, and a cache of semi-automatic weapons.

Anyways, here's Turbo Tax's summary of the tax changes for 2010, you tell me what it was that bit you.

As for cutting spending when times are tough, how's that working for Ireland? Greece? Spain? UK? Is it working for them, or are they in even worse shape than they were before they started? How are countries like Sweeden and Canada that did big stimulus (relative to their GDP anyways), currency devaluation and strict bank regulation doing?

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
No, my federal income tax went up to 35%. I made significantly less this year, as well. The difference between people like you and people like me, is that I'm freelance and considered to be a small business while you're an employee working for a corporation. My taxes went up. Yours probably went down.

That's the government incentivizing you to work for a corporation or the government.

Taxes aren't the only incentive for working for government and corporations. They have lower taxes to pay, so they can generally pay more and offer great benefits, as well. Freelancers like me cannot afford health or dental insurance. I could if they weren't stealing 35% of my income. Luckily for me, my fiancée works for a corporation so I'm a dependent on her policy.

Also, because I made less this year (thanks to the economy), I have to look at cutting my spending. Logical, right? So I have done so. But my 2010 expenses for doing business haven't gone down, and the cost of living has skyrocketed (especially here in LA). Agriculture is up. Gas is up. My utilities went up. And brilliantly my state and federal taxes have gone up. But really it's the federal income tax that's abhorrent.

Why is it the government can't cut its spending when times are tough? Why do they have to squeeze us during rough times? Why can't they see we're hurting and help us by taking a little less? Maybe if we didn't have to pay for all this defense spending? Maybe if Obama didn't go into Libya? Maybe we can get rid of some of these government departments? I mean, something? Anything?

There's never an answer for this except "pay your fair share". I wish I was paying my fair share, but 35% on top of a financial loss this year isn't fair. And didn't they report that we, the people, paid more in taxes this year than the corporations? Shocker.

So, NR, my taxes did in fact go up. They went way the hell up with everything else... except my income. Where's my reprieve? Where's Obama when the small businesses need him?

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
On taxes, which taxes went up? Income tax rates below $250K (and above!) are the same as they've been, and payroll taxes just got cut a bit. My federal taxes definitely went down, while my state & local have increased slightly, but Obama has nothing to do with those. The only tax increases I know of are on cigarettes, and maybe the expiration of tax cuts that began with the stimulus.

Has anyone heard the story about the SNL skit from the Dan Akroyd/Gilda Radner days where they reversed the roles? The women played the construction workers and Dan played a man walking by the construction site wearing shorts.

It was just a skit, but he ended up deeply upset by it.

All you guys who think this is nothing, just imagine... just imagine... if all you EVER saw of male images was young, taut muscled, and passive. No fighter jocks. No big funny guys with beer bellies. No firemen. Just... pretty body parts.

After you have spent ten minutes thinking about that, really thinking about it, then you can talk.

Until then, just shut the fuck up already. You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

ok, listen up people, first of all, the guy didnt live in the city. if you live in the city you get police, fire, water, sewer. roads, snow plows, etc. ok? if you dont live in the city, and dont pay taxes. you dont get those services. the city doesnt just run out and pave your road for ya because your truck gets stuck.. see? so they offered people who lived outside the corp limit a very reasonable fee for fire protection. 75 bucks. to help pay for equipment etc. for the extra protection outside their jurisdiction. you cant even fill up the truck for 75 bucks. a modern tower truck costs 500.000 to 850,000 dollars. the trucks and the manpower and the water and the equipment belong to the citizens of the town they are from. the taxpayers. not the firemen. if i take a firetruck or ambulance and provide servie to someone outside my jurisdiction, and a taxpayer needs me or my men or my truck or ambulance. do you think the taxpayer will be pissed off?? oh yea he will, and ill get fired. the citizens made this guy an offer, he declined. ill bet you a million dollars this guy has been offered the chance to get into the city but didnt want to pay the water ,sewer, city tax etc. now the guys son is in jail because he assaulted the fire chief. idiots times 2.also, they set the house on fire burning trash outside. if they lived in town the fire dept would make them put that out.or put it out for them. but they dont want that , so they live outside of town. where they can burn brush if they damn well want to. see? the firemen were doing what the citizens told them to do. the citizens run the fire dept. the citizens own everything in the dept.

>> ^blankfist:

Let's peel back the emotional responses and look at this reasonably.

Good advice, I'd recommend you take it, rather than simply deny this has anything to do with your beliefs, and try to pass this off as "government failure".

It's a baby step towards what a private system would look like. The only meaningfully different thing you'd have in a fully private system is that the firemen would've taken the $10,000 ransom payment they were offered to put out the fire.

So, instead of a man sitting out in front of the ruins of his house, he'd be sitting in front of his heavily-damaged home, talking about how the fire department is guilty of extortion for making him pay $10,000 or they'd let his house burn down.

Issue, if you go watch the video radx linked you see the guy 1) Just pain forgot and 2) Offered to pay on the spot.

To create an analogy (but steering clear of a logical fallacy): Lets say you had an Emergency Room tax in the same county. You go into an ER with a shotgun wound only to find out you forgot to pay this 'tax'. You offer to pay this tax on the spot. You also have medical insurance so it's not like you're completely out of the loop for having care done. You are still refused service and die in the waiting room due to your injuries, all because you missed paying a 'tax', not your insurance.

A man next to you when you got hit was hit by buckshot himself, but paid his 'tax'. That man lives to see another day because he received life saving medical attention. It doesn't seem to matter if he had medical insurance or not, he still gets help in the ER because he, unlike you, paid this 'tax'.

So now Gene Cranick sits in a trailer on his now burned property, while his neighbor (whom, per Gene, ALSO offered to pay the firemen) still has his home. Are you trying to tell me this is right? Or even acceptable behavior?

If this 'tax' (I've been putting it in quotes since it is not and insurance policy that is paying out for damages, it's to pay for a public service therefor it is a 'tax') was so god damn important to the county why were they not hounding this guy if he forgot to pay? I know if I forget to pay my local, state, or federal taxes I'm in deep shit.

>> ^luc
ky760:

OR
• You reap what you sow. You can't ignore paying insurance year after year then expect coverage after the fact. The fire department can't set that precedent otherwise no one will pay and they'll have to shut down.

I love those "Oh Gee Whiz" moments where you find you've accidentally left your pants at home and are sitting on the bus... that was a good summer.

>> ^Payback:

Is it just me or would these "firemen" be better off fighting the blaze than busting out the camera phone for the "oh gee whiz" moment?

Oh gods, Kevlar, I'm going to have to recover before I decide if that is the best comment, in so many ways, I have ever read.

In reply to this comment by Kevlar:
>> ^Payback:

Is it just me or would these "firemen" be better off fighting the blaze than busting out the camera phone for the "oh gee whiz" moment?


Payback, let's say you've got kids and are about to feed your new baby some formula but for some reason it sprouts demon wings and is now circling the bedroom ceiling, its head turned sideways, shouting the chants of gods long dead. Do you shrug your shoulders, grab a stepladder and immediately shove the spoon into one of its 5 new mouths? Or do you stand back in stupefied wonder before coming up with a plan that may or may not involve a butterfly net and pruning shears?

My reading of your comment is that that people should not hesitate before aiming a hose at a tornado. I love your comments, but in this case I'd argue that the situation is truly and perversely fucked enough (and outside the realm of their normal experience) to make a slow response a little more understandable.

>> ^Payback:

Is it just me or would these "firemen" be better off fighting the blaze than busting out the camera phone for the "oh gee whiz" moment?


Payback, let's say you've got kids and are about to feed your new baby some formula but for some reason it sprouts demon wings and is now circling the bedroom ceiling, its head turned sideways, shouting the chants of gods long dead. Do you shrug your shoulders, grab a stepladder and immediately shove the spoon into one of its 5 new mouths? Or do you stand back in stupefied wonder before coming up with a plan that may or may not involve a butterfly net and pruning shears?

My reading of your comment is that that people should not hesitate before aiming a hose at a tornado. I love your comments, but in this case I'd argue that the situation is truly and perversely fucked enough (and outside the realm of their normal experience) to make a slow response a little more understandable.

Is it just me or would these "firemen" be better off fighting the blaze than busting out the camera phone for the "oh gee whiz" moment?

There's more than one video floating around on this site talking about what the Exxon spill did to animals and people alike. What is said in this video is very similar to those, and all of them are from different people that I've seen. I think it's more likely that government is full of shit in anything they do to downplay it versus what these individuals are saying that are in the medical field and have been studying it trying to cure people since Exxon.

Because we already know that government and oil have not invested in new methods to clean up oil spills, so it's very unlikely they would also invest money into research on what exposure does to people during and after clean up from the Exxon.

If this oil leak is not taken of when they estimate it will be which from what I've read is late July and August for the relief wells to come online. If it keeps spilling out even with the additional wells, I don't see how anyone in this part of the world will be safe from it's effects given weather patterns and ocean currents. I saw on Craig Fergeson they had I believe his name is Jean Cousteau, son of Jacques Cousteau, who was talking about how the oil in the gulf would begin appearing in England due to the water currents and how saturated the water column is because of the disperants.

Lots of very disturbing videos out there regarding what the oil spill has done already. People on the water who were vomiting over the side because the fumes from the water was cutting off the oxygen and causing nausea. Fish so disoriented they were swimming into boats, swimming on their sides and upside down with their mouths sticking out of the water trying to breath. No sightings of dolphins in Florida for a long while, so they are either dead, dieing, or left the area. Kids breaking out in rashes who mysteriously recover shortly after leaving the areas in proximity to tainted zones. Fishermen who are aiding in the clean up, coming down with upper respiratory problems, going to their doctors and being told their lungs look like they've been smoking 3 packs a day when they are in fact non-smokers.

The same responders who at 911 telling people they should wear respirators for the clean up, who say that firemen who refused to wear them in 911 rescues came down with "the crud" from exposure to toxins. They say every person helping clean up the oil spill is offered a respirator, but BP took over distribution of them. And they won't allow people to have respirators without proper training in how to use them, which they will provide. But they won't begin the training until they feel people need the respirators. So you have the right to a respirator, they will give you one when you are trained, but they won't provide training until you need one. Makes perfect sense, like everything else associated with the handling of this.

Crops are diseased and dieing already from just the rain carrying the chemicals used to "clean up" the oil spill. I can't imagine that people out on the water aren't already severely exposed to these same chemicals if it can travel via water evaporation into the clouds to come down as rain...it has to be in the air for them all.

From other sources, they call exposure in Exxon and 911 "the crud" or "The Exxon crud". And people exposed to it have it for the rest of their life and eventually die because of it. I could see people in 911 being exposed just because it was a fast response situation and people were trying to do the right thing in a very short period of time. But there is no excuse for what is happening now, especially with the Exxon spill being there as evidence and proof of what can and will happen to people exposed to the oil and the chemicals used in it's clean up. A disaster caused by BP for money/time saving measures is one thing, but then allowing people trying to help contain a problem they had nothing to do with but bear all of the consequences of it to become ill and probably die from their efforts to help....that's something that can not stand.