New Golf Rules
President B.H.O. has appointed himself as the Golf Czar, and announced these major rule changes will take effect on January 1, 2013. This is only a preview as the complete rule book (expect 2716 pages) is being rewritten as we speak. (The effective date was chosen so as not to influence the election.)
Here are a few of the changes:
Golfers with handicaps:
- Below 10 will have their green fees increased by 35%.
- Between 11 and 18 will see no increase in green fees.
- Above 18 will get a $20 check each time they play.
The term "gimmie" will be changed to "entitlement" and will be used as follows:
- Handicaps below 10, no entitlements.
- Handicaps from 11 to 17, entitlements for putter length putts.
- Handicaps above 18, if your ball is on green, no need to putt, just pick it up.
These entitlements are intended to bring about fairness and, most importantly, equality in scoring.
In addition, a Player will be limited to a maximum of one birdie or six pars in any given 18-hole round. Any excess must be given to those fellow players who have not yet scored a birdie or par. Only after all players have received a birdie or par from the player actually making the birdie or par, can that player begin to count his pars and birdies again .
The current USGA handicap system will be used for the above purposes, but the term "net score" will be available only for scoring those players with handicaps of 18 and above. This is intended to "re-distribute" the success of winning by making sure that in all competitions every Player above an 18 handicap will post only "net score" against every other player's "gross score".
These new Rules are intended to CHANGE the game of golf.
Golf must be about Fairness. It should have nothing to do with ability, hard work, practice, and responsibility.
This is the "Right thing to do."
So, please remember; if you shot a round of golf under par, you didn't shoot it yourself. Some one else built that course, and someone else cut the grass so that you could play on it. Someone else built the clubs and the cart.
I would certainly hope so. If he hits a golf ball like he throws out a first pitch at a baseball game, the women's tee box and a 100 large steps forward from that should give him the necessary handicap.
Do these new rules mean that although I have never played golf in my life and never plan to play, that after January 1, 2013, I could actually win--maybe even a tournament, and maybe even get some money for it, even though I didn't pay anything not to play?
that after January 1, 2013, I could actually win -- Posted by whoknows? on Tue, Oct 9, 2012, at 10:08 AM
Yes. It's the new golf "spreading the wealth/fair share" program where winners become losers and losers become winners.
That is exactly what it means. So you are actually going to be a 'Golfer in Absenteeism'... or something like that. Doesn't matter... you have money coming. Just vote for Obama.
Well, I guess I'll just have to pass on the freebies then. Nothing in my moral beliefs could make me vote to keep Obie in office. Uhhhh. Makes me sick to even think of it.
Tiger Woods handicap below 10.
My handicap above 18.
I've played all of the pro tournaments as an absentee.
How much does Tiger owe me, and when can I expect a check? Hope Tiger knows that I can swing a club as good or better than his ex-wife. :-)
I wish I could help you with the calculations on how much you are owed by Tiger Woods.... but I could never master figuring the handicaping system as it now stands, let alone the liberal method.
But I am pretty sure if my handicap is calculated you and Tiger are both going to owe me money.
Wheels, after all its the good intentions that count most.
Thank you Voyager, I knew good intentions would count with someone. :-)
Why, wheels, you are being mean spirited with evil intentions to hear the Democrats tell it. It so important to feel are fuzzy ball and mushy thought and stop all of this hard hearted rational realism that afflicts you right wing extremists.
Voyager, maybe my Democratic friends will relate better with this example of our Progressive Tax System.
Our Tax System Explained in Beer
This is good! "The tax system explained in beer. Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100...
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18, and the tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men ? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free.
But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and politicians, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand.... no explanation is possible!
Wheels: You are truly a Professor of Economics. This thread should be sent to all members of Congress and Obama....never mind they do not understand so no explanation is possible.
After Nov.6, no explanation will be necessary!
Wheels, I can't help but wonder what is the richest man told all the rest "to hell with drinking beer, I'm switching to ginger ale. You drink and pay for your beverage and I'll drink and pay for mine."
Have a feeling the others will have an accounting problem!
Got to clear this up. Not my work, just more copy and paste.
I hate ginger ale. Have a Canadian friend that always served it. I politely said, no thank you, I would really like a glass of water.
But Wheels, you have not attacked the accounting problem!
I cannot find anything to disagree with in the Accounting Problem as it relates to our tax system. I think it describes it perfectly.
Semo471, was giving me credit where credit was not due for authoring it and I thought I best clear that up quickly, as we have been raked over the coals most recently for being guilty of the sin of Plagiarism. Heaven help me, should I try and plagiarize anything so important as this example.
Do you suppose this guy was one of the beer drinkers?
Posting a comment requires free registration: