Perry Nullifies Obamacare in Texas!

[SlowwHand]

Perry is very big on State's Rights and telling the feds to butt out. I like that.

[Ben Kenobi]

Dude, we all saw that post that your brother put in before you deleted it.

So you're basing your claim on something that you've never seen or heard yourself?

You sure as **** didn't travel to Texas because it's your loony-tunes Libertarian Paradise

Yeah, which is why I camped out with Floyd, eh? Yessiree, no 'loony toons libertarian paradise' there.

because you're a creepy stalker.

Apparently I hit a nerve. For someone who left Texas, you sure seem to care about it.

you're a tough guy individualist

Ron Paul is a macho dude who does roundhouse kicks to the face when he's not sewing pajamas with his teeth?

I think Ron Paul is right about the fiscal situation that the US is in, and he's one of the few who get it. I dunno why being 'right' is being a 'tough guy'. Right is right. If the US wants to destroy itself through fiscal insanity, that's one thing, but those who are trying to fight it to save the republic quite another.

You want the government to pay for your healthcare and benefits, fine - but my faith is pretty clear about that - I can't pay for it under any circumstances.

[Lonestar]

So you're basing your claim on something that you've never seen or heard yourself?

You're right, I wasn't stalking you in person. This is because I am reasonably adjusted enough not to cross multiple state borders chasing girls.

And honestly, that post kinda jives well with your "living in a fantasy land" field you give off in posts.

Yeah, which is why I camped out with Floyd, eh? Yessiree, no 'loony toons libertarian paradise' there.

I'm not sure what you mean by that statement.

Apparently I hit a nerve. For someone who left Texas, you sure seem to care about it.

I went to Texas A&M for a year. I lived in Texas for less than a year when I was like 2. I am frequently in Texas because I have family there, but I've never lived in Texas for longer than a year. Most of my adult life has been split between san Diego and Virginia.

Ron Paul is a macho dude who does roundhouse kicks to the face when he's not sewing pajamas with his teeth?

I think Ron Paul is right about the fiscal situation that the US is in, and he's one of the few who get it. I dunno why being 'right' is being a 'tough guy'. Right is right. If the US wants to destroy itself through fiscal insanity, that's one thing, but those who are trying to fight it to save the republic quite another.

You want the government to pay for your healthcare and benefits, fine - but my faith is pretty clear about that - I can't pay for it under any circumstances.

So, by your own admission you would need some kinda of public healthcare option if, say, you got a serious case of cancer? And you would be perfectly okay with dying from said chronic condition?

Man, okay, fine. But you'd also be okay with throwing other people under the bus, despite your "Christian Faith"? Man. Well, at least that stacks up with your boy Ron Paul, who let the guy who ran his 2008 campaign website die because he couldn't afford healthcare.

[Lonestar]

Addendum to the above:

Also, I find the "if you don't live here, why do you care?" implication funny. Yes, why would I care about the politics of the second biggest state in the union in both area and population?

[Ben Kenobi]

You're right, I wasn't stalking you in person. This is because I am reasonably adjusted enough not to cross multiple state borders chasing girls.

Lonestar, I don't know you. I've not had the privilege of meeting you. I'm not going to say that 'you are X' because I don't know you. That's not fair to you. I could go around and talk to other folks on the forum who know you better and then say you are X.

But what's the point? Even if I'm right it's all, "so what, yeah I'm an ass", but asses can be right.

And sometimes so can loony tunes paul supporters.

It's just a factual statement. I'm not going to say anything about you in public unless I'm damned sure I saw it and heard it myself.

And honestly, that post kinda jives well with your "living in a fantasy land" field you give off in posts.

Well, now you're assuming that how I am in person is the same as I am on Apolyton.

I'm not sure what you mean by that statement.

You were making an assumption about my motivations. If I didn't enjoy that part of Texas, why would I choose to stay with someone who was a huge fan of it, and experience it all?

I went to Texas A&M for a year. I lived in Texas for less than a year when I was like 2. I am frequently in Texas because I have family there, but I've never lived in Texas for longer than a year. Most of my adult life has been split between san Diego and Virginia.

Interesting. So why do you identify with the state so strongly? "Lone Star" and all? I've only been here closing in on two years now. I like Texas as it is, and I don't believe I have the right to change it. I left because I was very unhappy with Canada for years. Even before I started posting on Apolyton and that was 10 years ago.

I was clinically depressed after my second year of university and discovered Poly about a year or so afterwards. Poly was a haven for me, as an opportunity to talk with really smart people. I ended up switching to a history major and decided I wanted to be a teacher.

I worked, saved up and graduated in 2007. I wasn't happy with school, felt like a fish out of water. Looked for work up in Canada, and they changed the curriculum on me, around the time that I graduated. For me to work as a teacher meant teaching stuff that I don't believe in or agree it.

Texas has a few advantages, jobs for teachers, an excellent curriculum, and, most importantly for me, a chance to live with people that believe the same things I do. I don't have that in my family, my family isn't Christian. Here in Texas I don't have to apologize for my faith, I work with people who are all pulling the same cart together. I never had that before.

That is why I am here in Texas, I really enjoy the work that I do and the people that I work with.

So, by your own admission you would need some kinda of public healthcare option if, say, you got a serious case of cancer? And you would be perfectly okay with dying from said chronic condition?

Yeah, I sure would be. Actions have consequences. It's not fair for Americans to have to pay for my health care coverage. I should damn well cover myself, and if I can't afford it then I have to do without.

But you'd also be okay with throwing other people under the bus, despite your "Christian Faith"?

Not at all. I think Christians have an obligation to care for each other. If someone was sick and needed care, and whatever, I would help them however I could. Roughly 1/4 of the hospitals in Texas are owned by the Catholic church. That's where my tithes are going. All I ask is that the government lets us keep running the hospitals and we will pay for them ourselves. They'll treat anybody in need.

Man. Well, at least that stacks up with your boy Ron Paul, who let the guy who ran his 2008 campaign website die because he couldn't afford healthcare.

I like Paul, agree with him on some things, disagree with him on other things. But he gets the financial situation right.

[Ben Kenobi]

Yes, why would I care about the politics of the second biggest state in the union in both area and population?

They call it flyover country for a reason.

[Aeson]

First, just because Obama says that he's "going to set it up anyways", doesn't mean that he can or will. He's welcome to try to that with Texas, good luck with that.

Can Texans not trade on the NYSE? I fail to see how Texas can stop an exchange from being set up.

Second, If the policy was a winner, Obama wouldn't have to cram it down our throat. With Texas defying the law and 6 others doing the same, if they get to 35 states, what Obama wants and what the supreme court wants no longer matters.

It's a bit more complicated than that. First of all, Texas isn't really defying the law, just passing the responsibility for the exchange to the feds. Second, defying this small clause of the law is a long ways from supporting an ammendment (which you seem to be hinting at for reasons that are beyond me... all they need is legislation to overturn it.) In any case, 6 is a long way from 35.

Does Obama really want the spectacle of arresting people in Texas federally for defying the penalty? Is he willing to override the local authorities in order to have the feds pick people up?

Texans and people in Texas get picked up by Feds and prosecuted in Federal courts all the time. As for spectacles, unless there's some anti-Obamacare cult holed up in a compound the ATF (or the Bureau of Making Uninsured Peoples Pay) sets fire to, it doesn't seem like it would even register.

Not at all. None of Obamacare can be enforced without the exchanges.

Which will exist anyways.

This is very much about liberty. People should not be forced to pay a tax just for breathing.

I'm an opponent of Obamacare in general... but having the Feds set up the exchange instead of doing it yourself doesn't seem to accomplish anything other than perhaps saving some money and giving up some control.

[Lonestar]

Lonestar, I don't know you. I've not had the privilege of meeting you. I'm not going to say that 'you are X' because I don't know you. That's not fair to you. I could go around and talk to other folks on the forum who know you better and then say you are X.

But what's the point? Even if I'm right it's all, "so what, yeah I'm an ass", but asses can be right.

And sometimes so can loony tunes paul supporters.

It's just a factual statement. I'm not going to say anything about you in public unless I'm damned sure I saw it and heard it myself.

Hold on Ben, you're the one that brought up "Hurr hurr why are you in Texas then?"

Don't get your knickers in the twist when I chuck it back at you.

Well, now you're assuming that how I am in person is the same as I am on Apolyton.

Actually...yes.

The era of "everyone is a dog on the Internet" is kinda gone. Nowadays people take quite a bit less effort to conceal their identity and personality, especially on messageboards and forums they frequent. Sure, there are people who have 30 novelty accounts on some place like reddit, and Wiglaf who is so settled in his role he will not change it, but those are outliers.

You were making an assumption about my motivations. If I didn't enjoy that part of Texas, why would I choose to stay with someone who was a huge fan of it, and experience it all?

Easy, you found a job easily.

I mean, it really is that simple.

Interesting. So why do you identify with the state so strongly? "Lone Star" and all?

(1)As I've mentioned, I have family there. My Dad was AD so we moved around so often that I didn't really have a "home". My parents home of Record was in Fort Worth, and wehn I went to Texas A&M in Fall of 2000, it was the closest I had to a "home state".

(2) My favorite movie of all time is Space Balls.

I've only been here closing in on two years now. I like Texas as it is, and I don't believe I have the right to change it. I left because I was very unhappy with Canada for years. Even before I started posting on Apolyton and that was 10 years ago.

And you moving across International lines makes you an outlier, at least in terms of being able to afford it. In order to take the Libertarian drivel of "well, why don't you just move?" you often have to have a good chunk of cash saved up anyway, and be willing to jettison family and friends locally. It's why I roll my eyes at you talking about services you don't like or need. You(or your family) was obviously wealthy enough to get you to Texas, and/or you didn't have any personal attachments to Canada, which jives with the whole libertarian "individuality" schitck.

I was clinically depressed after my second year of university and discovered Poly about a year or so afterwards. Poly was a haven for me, as an opportunity to talk with really smart people. I ended up switching to a history major and decided I wanted to be a teacher.

I worked, saved up and graduated in 2007. I wasn't happy with school, felt like a fish out of water. Looked for work up in Canada, and they changed the curriculum on me, around the time that I graduated. For me to work as a teacher meant teaching stuff that I don't believe in or agree it.

Assuming you are being completely honest here, it sounds more like you're whining that you couldn't find a public school that allowed you to spout your narrative on religion, so you went somewhere you could. A private religious school in Texas. It doesn't even seem to occur to you that it's you who is in the wrong.

Texas has a few advantages, jobs for teachers, an excellent curriculum, and, most importantly for me, a chance to live with people that believe the same things I do. I don't have that in my family, my family isn't Christian. Here in Texas I don't have to apologize for my faith, I work with people who are all pulling the same cart together. I never had that before.

You didn't have to apologize for your faith in Canada either. What you're really saying is "Now I can spout my religion to a captive audience(school) and have people agree with me that I can push my religious beliefs on others".

That is why I am here in Texas, I really enjoy the work that I do and the people that I work with.

I find it fascinating that you wrote that whole thing clearly thinking that it was a compelling sob story of persecution.

Yeah, I sure would be. Actions have consequences. It's not fair for Americans to have to pay for my health care coverage. I should damn well cover myself, and if I can't afford it then I have to do without.

Not every "consequence" is related to an action. Whose fault is it if you get cancer because a local company was getting rid of dangerous chemicals improperly? Maybe you can sue for the cash, sure, but they don't have to pay up until you convince a court and you might expire inbetween now and then.

"Bad Things" don't always happen to people because of personal decisions they made.

Not at all. I think Christians have an obligation to care for each other. If someone was sick and needed care, and whatever, I would help them however I could. Roughly 1/4 of the hospitals in Texas are owned by the Catholic church. That's where my tithes are going. All I ask is that the government lets us keep running the hospitals and we will pay for them ourselves. They'll treat anybody in need.

Yes, except that those Hospitals don't cover everyone who walks in with a chronic condition, do they? They'll treat you in the ER-because they're required by law-, but not longterm cancer care, or coughing up for major surgery, etc. Not even close to all of those RCC-run Hospitals are charitable, not really. They still expect the patient to pay, either through government programs, insurance, or personal wealth.

I like Paul, agree with him on some things, disagree with him on other things. But he gets the financial situation right.

yeah, he's real big into "**** everyone else, I got mine".

[Ben Kenobi]

Can Texans not trade on the NYSE? I fail to see how Texas can stop an exchange from being set up.

No TX company is required to list with the NYSE. It's entirely voluntary. These 'exchanges' aren't really 'exchanges'. A better word is transfers. The federal government would require Texas to register everyone in the state with the program, and, the big part, share information with the federal government (health, etc), in order to ensure compliance.

It can't really be done successfully without state compliance. If a state is unwilling to submit proper records, then it's impossible for the federal government to collect that information. What Obama will probably try to do is to do it through the IRS, people who are residents in Texas and pay taxes to the feds there, would likely get hit for compliance. Then it becomes a question, what is Obama willing to do to force people into it? Is he really willing to send federal agents to Texas, to arrest Texans for non-compliance?

It's a bit more complicated than that. First of all, Texas isn't really defying the law, just passing the responsibility for the exchange to the feds. Second, defying this small clause of the law is a long ways from supporting an ammendment (which you seem to be hinting at for reasons that are beyond me... all they need is legislation to overturn it.) In any case, 6 is a long way from 35.

Not when it involves the sharing of health information, and the transfer of said information from the state to the feds. 6, including TX have successfully passed a bill cutting off these components, another 26 are along the way. 32 is pretty close to having the states to successfully pass an amendment, and there's nothing Obama can do about that. If the states feel that there's nothing else that can't be done, then this is probably what will happen.

Texans and people in Texas get picked up by Feds and prosecuted in Federal courts all the time. As for spectacles, unless there's some anti-Obamacare cult holed up in a compound the ATF (or the Bureau of Making Uninsured Peoples Pay) sets fire to, it doesn't seem like it would even register.

The papers down here will be all over that like flies on ****, if Obama tries to arrest someone for 'not paying his due'.

I'm an opponent of Obamacare in general... but having the Feds set up the exchange instead of doing it yourself doesn't seem to accomplish anything other than perhaps saving some money and giving up some control.

It's not intended to do anything more than to protect Texas in the meantime, until more permanent measures can be passed. It's a stop gap. Enough states pass it and it becomes increasingly unlikely that Obamacare will survive in the long run.

[onodera]

So Perry ****ed a quarter of his electorate in the ass, didn't he? How will this affect his reelection chances?

[Lonestar]

So Perry ****ed a quarter of his electorate in the ass, didn't he? How will this affect his reelection chances?

It won't.

The GOP in Texas have already gerrymandered it to hell(so as to remove libruls from forming blocks out of Houston and Austin), and a lot of Texans just believe whatever the GOP Machine tells them.

[Ben Kenobi]

"Hurr hurr why are you in Texas then?"

I had thought you supported that policy in Texas, so I was surprised to see you saying something that I didn't expect.

Actually...yes.

There's a difference between concealing one's identity (which I never have), and between how one interacts with people. People do not interact with each other in person in the same way that they interact with one another online. Really, you'd be very surprised if you met me. I've had people say that they preferred me online because I was much less tentative. I don't really, say, all that much over the course of a day. Not unless I have a reason to.

Easy, you found a job easily.

Why would I choose to stay with Floyd if I wasn't interested in libertarianism? Sure, I got a job, but I could have stayed elsewhere.

My parents home of Record was in Fort Worth, and wehn I went to Texas A&M in Fall of 2000, it was the closest I had to a "home state".

After being, what, an army brat? I apologize. My comment was uncalled for. I wasn't trying to be a dick.

And you moving across International lines makes you an outlier, at least in terms of being able to afford it. In order to take the Libertarian drivel of "well, why don't you just move?" you often have to have a good chunk of cash saved up anyway, and be willing to jettison family and friends locally.

Which is what I did. Graduated in 07, didn't make it down here till 2010. That's three years of working and saving. Drove down over 5 days, stayed with friends most of the way. My brother came along with me and we did the whole road trip thing.

Total cost, 5 days at about 40 bucks per tank of gas is about 200 dollars. About that for accomodations since we stayed with friends or cheap-ass motels. Plus some for food and incidentals and emergencies. Bout 800 bucks in all.

So it wasn't really that expensive to come down. But yes, you're right, I did have it planned out and had been planning to leave for quite some time.

you didn't have any personal attachments to Canada

Yes, and no. Like I said "I wasn't happy there" is a long way away from not having any personal attachment to Canada. I have friends, and family that I speak with regularly. I was happy where I grew up and I do miss it, and I do miss my friends and family.

But, even though I'm by myself here, and I don't have very many friends, I'm still far happier here than up in Canada. Far happier.

Assuming you are being completely honest here, it sounds more like you're whining that you couldn't find a public school that allowed you to spout your narrative on religion, so you went somewhere you could. A private religious school in Texas. It doesn't even seem to occur to you that it's you who is in the wrong.

Why work somewhere that despises you and what you believe? Texas was a natural fit. As most of the posters on here will tell you.

You didn't have to apologize for your faith in Canada either.

Have you ever been in Canada? Have you attended a university up there in the liberal arts? Half my teachers, let alone the students despised me and told me so. Yes, you are expected to apologize for your faith, explain that you're not 'one of them', and explain how you have 'evolved' beyond that understanding of the world.

I didn't play that game, and I paid the price for it while I was there.

I did meet some really cool people and some of them were my teachers too. Very grateful for them. They encouraged me to continue on.

Now I can spout my religion to a captive audience(school) and have people agree with me that I can push my religious beliefs on others

If the school is founded on the explicit purpose of educating young boys and girls in their faith, am I 'pushing my religious beliefs' on anyone? My contract is very explicit and says that I'm required to teach in adherence to what the Church teaches, and that nothing I teach is contrary.

I find it fascinating that you wrote that whole thing clearly thinking that it was a compelling sob story of persecution.

Why not? It's all true.

Not every "consequence" is related to an action.

The consequence is choosing not to purchase insurance.

Whose fault is it if you get cancer because a local company was getting rid of dangerous chemicals improperly?

Again, actions have consequences. Is it my fault for getting cancer? No. Is it my fault for not purchasing insurance so that I would be covered? Yes. I have to live with that decision. If I don't have the foresight to anticipate problems, or if I choose to save money here for other things, then I should expect to live with the consequence for these decisions.

Yes, except that those Hospitals don't cover everyone who walks in with a chronic condition, do they?

They'll treat them, and send them home.

Not even close to all of those RCC-run Hospitals are charitable, not really. They still expect the patient to pay, either through government programs, insurance, or personal wealth.

Sure, if the patient is able, but if they are not, the RCC run hospitals will treat the patients who come in through the door. You might not like the level of care, but that's a far cry from letting people die on the streets.

The hospitals have been there a long time. Even if the government weren't there, they would still be operating, doing what they would be doing. If people didn't have to pay half their income to the government, then they could afford to donate more to help run these charitable hospitals.

he's real big into "**** everyone else, I got mine".

Which is why he's calling for lower taxes on everyone. I see. Seems to me he's trying to make it so that everyone can be wealthy.

[Lonestar]

I had thought you supported that policy in Texas, so I was surprised to see you saying something that I didn't expect.



There's a difference between concealing one's identity (which I never have), and between how one interacts with people. People do not interact with each other in person in the same way that they interact with one another online. Really, you'd be very surprised if you met me. I've had people say that they preferred me online because I was much less tentative. I don't really, say, all that much over the course of a day. Not unless I have a reason to.



Why would I choose to stay with Floyd if I wasn't interested in libertarianism? Sure, I got a job, but I could have stayed elsewhere.

You were in a different country and didn't know anyone else except for this guy you met on the Internet.

Also not a hard answer.

After being, what, an army brat? I apologize. My comment was uncalled for. I wasn't trying to be a dick.

USMC Brat.

Which is what I did. Graduated in 07, didn't make it down here till 2010. That's three years of working and saving. Drove down over 5 days, stayed with friends most of the way. My brother came along with me and we did the whole road trip thing.

Total cost, 5 days at about 40 bucks per tank of gas is about 200 dollars. About that for accomodations since we stayed with friends or cheap-ass motels. Plus some for food and incidentals and emergencies. Bout 800 bucks in all.

So it wasn't really that expensive to come down. But yes, you're right, I did have it planned out and had been planning to leave for quite some time.



Yes, and no. Like I said "I wasn't happy there" is a long way away from not having any personal attachment to Canada. I have friends, and family that I speak with regularly. I was happy where I grew up and I do miss it, and I do miss my friends and family.

But, even though I'm by myself here, and I don't have very many friends, I'm still far happier here than up in Canada. Far happier.

Fine.

Why work somewhere that despises you and what you believe? Texas was a natural fit. As most of the posters on here will tell you.

Yeah, I still strongly doubt that Canada "despises you and what you believe".

Have you ever been in Canada? Have you attended a university up there in the liberal arts? Half my teachers, let alone the students despised me and told me so. Yes, you are expected to apologize for your faith, explain that you're not 'one of them', and explain how you have 'evolved' beyond that understanding of the world.

Interestingly, I have experienced a pretty close analog to it.

There was a very conservative guy(and also prior military) in one of my classes(Back when I was working on my AA after I got out of the Navy) who absolutely did not like what he was hearing in a history class, and he was giving some pretty ****ty counterpoints. One day he blew up about the "liberal professors"(lol part time instructors at a CC) and claimed he was being "persecuted for his conservative beliefs".

No, it was because he was being an ass and doing a ****ty job of backing up his claims. Your sob story about the professors picking on you puts me in the mind of that guy, not geniuine persecution which is what you're making it out to be.

I didn't play that game, and I paid the price for it while I was there.

I did meet some really cool people and some of them were my teachers too. Very grateful for them. They encouraged me to continue on.



If the school is founded on the explicit purpose of educating young boys and girls in their faith, am I 'pushing my religious beliefs' on anyone? My contract is very explicit and says that I'm required to teach in adherence to what the Church teaches, and that nothing I teach is contrary.

Again, You went as far as you could until you found a captive audience to push your religious beliefs...which just so happen to coincide with the organization you're working for.

Why not? It's all true.

"...From a certain point of view."

The consequence is choosing not to purchase insurance.

Assuming the ludricous implication that buying insurance will protect you from medical-related bankruptcy(it won't), not everyone can afford insurance, and you're basically saying "**** you kids" to any children who aren't covered.

Again, actions have consequences. Is it my fault for getting cancer? No. Is it my fault for not purchasing insurance so that I would be covered? Yes. I have to live with that decision. If I don't have the foresight to anticipate problems, or if I choose to save money here for other things, then I should expect to live with the consequence for these decisions.

Even if you had bought insurance it wouldn't have meant you'd have good coverage, or avoid medical related bankruptcy. Sometimes you can do everythign right and **** happens. And your response? "Oh, whelp, somehow it's a case of personal responsibility".

They'll treat them, and send them home.

They'll treat them for the acute symptom, not the chronic condition, unless they are properly covered.

Sure, if the patient is able, but if they are not, the RCC run hospitals will treat the patients who come in through the door. You might not like the level of care, but that's a far cry from letting people die on the streets.

RCC hospitals do not treat chronic conditions for anything remotely affordable, at least not on meaningful scale. Again, they will treat the acute symptom, whcih is normally pretty cheap, but not the chronic condition. "No Insurance/Government aid/personal wealth? Guess you can't get that heart surgery"

The hospitals have been there a long time. Even if the government weren't there, they would still be operating, doing what they would be doing. If people didn't have to pay half their income to the government, then they could afford to donate more to help run these charitable hospitals.

Are you unaware that you can write off charitable contributions?

Which is why he's calling for lower taxes on everyone. I see. Seems to me he's trying to make it so that everyone can be wealthy.

It's still "**** everyone else, I got mine".

You think telling someone who is so poor he isn't in a taxable bracket anyway that "Ron Paul cares about you, but he's going to get rid of a *lot* of healthcare options, and education, so he personally can pay less taxes".

[Tuberski]

This is very much about liberty. People should not be forced to pay a tax just for breathing.

Then why are there taxes on food and water? I shouldn't be forced to pay taxes on those either.

Well, now you're assuming that how I am in person is the same as I am on Apolyton.

I know, for a fact, that you are the same in real life.

ACK!

[Ben Kenobi]

Then why are there taxes on food and water? I shouldn't be forced to pay taxes on those either.

Unless I'm reading it incorrectly:

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=R&app=9&p_dir=&p_rloc=&p_tloc=&p_ploc=&pg=1&p_tac=&ti=34&pt=1&ch=3&rl=318

(f) Water. The sales tax law specifically exempts the sale of water, including spring water, sparkling water, or mineral water, from sales or use tax. The exemption includes the sale of bottled water and water that a restaurant or any other food service provider sells. An exemption certificate is not required. Flavored water (carbonated or non-carbonated) is a soft drink and is taxable. See §3.293 of this title (relating to Food; Food Products; Meals; Food Service) for further information on soft drinks. The sale of brine water, other than naturally occurring brine water, is taxable.

I know, for a fact, that you are the same in real life.

Ok then.