For my liberal friends

“I was reading how the Republicons in Michigan want to cut teacher's pensions and health care.

How stupid of the union to support Democrats.


http://www.freep.com/news/mich/schoolcash5e_20050705.htm
last edited: 7/06/05 11:26:52 AM”

“Since one element of the discussion has turned to the government taking your money and then giving it away vs. the efficieny of you simply donating to whichever groups you wanted to support, I thought I'd share this "efficiency" theory. Enjoy all you right & left wingers, it has something for all :)


Dead Horse Theory


In the tribal wisdom of the Dakota Indians, passed on from generation to generation, it says that, "When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount."

However, in government, education, and in corporate America, more advanced strategies are often employed, such as:

1. Buying a stronger whip.

2. Changing riders.

3. Appointing a committee to study the horse.

4. Arranging to visit other countries to see how other cultures ride dead horses.

5. Lowering the standards so that dead horses can be included.

6. Reclassifying the dead horse as living-impaired.

7. Hiring outside contractors to ride the dead horse.

8. Harnessing several dead horses together to increase speed.

9. Providing additional funding and/or training to increase dead horse's performance.

10. Doing a productivity study to see if lighter riders would improve the dead horse's performance.

11. Declaring that as the dead horse does not have to be fed, it is less costly, carries lower overhead and therefore contributes substantially more to the bottom line of the economy than do some other horses.

12. Rewriting the expected performance requirements for all horses.

And of course....

13. Promoting the dead horse to a supervisory position.”

“LOL.

Pennsylvania just created a new bureau, the Bureau of Procurement. It's bigger government designed to help other bureau's spend money. LOL!

I'm waiting for Governor Rendell to start the Bureau of Bureau Elimination. I wouldn't doubt it will happen.
last edited: 7/06/05 11:36:16 AM”

“Mmmmm.....Giant Snickers and a bumper of Gennesee beer.”

“Give it up Sarge. Most liberals advocacy for government care for the poor is not because an honest concern for the welfare of their fellow man. They do if for a purely selfish reason. They want to feel good about themselves without giving anything of substance themselves. If they did truly care about the poor, they would be giving of their on free will and give in amounts that cause them some pain. Just for an example look at many of our lovely Hollywood celebrities. They have more money than they can count for what is in my opinion is a skill less than that of a good electrician. Yet they want the government to take my money from me and give it to this or that cause. They themselves will not give the same amount as a percentage of disposable income. If they were really concerned they would give it without the government forcing it (some probably do). When Susan Sarandon gives away so much money that she lives at near the standard of living as a normal dentist she will have credibility in her advocacy. Until then she and her kind are egotistical deceitful whiners.

I love the discussion here with people citing a book them believe to be false to support their view. That is precious.

Disclaimer: I am for a government sponsored “safety net”. I am more in favor of empowering people to be self sufficient. Dependency is slavery.
last edited: 7/06/05 1:05:04 PM”

“Dave Barry:

The Democrats seem to be basically nicer people, but they have demonstrated time and again that they have the management skills of celery. They're the kind of people who'd stop to help you change a flat, but would somehow manage to set your car on fire. I would be reluctant to entrust them with a Cuisinart, let alone the economy. The Republicans, on the other hand, would know how to fix your tire, but they wouldn't bother to stop because they'd want to be on time for Ugly Pants Night at the country club.”

“mtn gal - Stop projecting your sick pathologies onto others.”

“Violin.......well put.

I didn't want to say anything for fear of being called a dirty commie.”

“Actually 'sick pathologies' is redundant but you know what I meant.”

“Yeah, Mtn Gal, how DARE you suggest that people put their money where their mouth is, or that they stop creating a permanent undeclass by telling them that "mommy government" will take care of them & they don't have to think about self-responsibility.

What a whacko you are!”

“ugly pants night hee hee”

“Just where are these people arguing for unlimited government handouts? I only hear about them from folks trying to justify their own unfettered greed. Can you cite just one?”

“I didn't say unlimited, put your broad brush away. And I'll accept your apology anytime for your inference that I am greedy just because I best believe in helping people by teaching them to help themselves.

It is a difference of opinion as to how to best solve a problem, Violin, it is not necessarily always "the good guys vs. the bad guys". I don't understand why that's so hard for some to acknowledge.”

“Yeah, Ewker, she has a choice to join the union. Just as I have a choice to pay taxes.




Chili, I need clarification here:

What “Democrat Administration?”

Can you please explain your understanding of Macro-Economics as it relates to exactly what specific policies the “Democrat Administration” implemented that were more economically efficient than the “Republican administration?”

What Republican Administration?



You can’t spend more than you make? Well, no poop! But Chili, it was a Republican Congress that finally passed the so-called Balanced Budget Amendment. Up until that time, Democrats in Congress had been spending like drunken monkeys.

Government spending has been increasing at a staggering rate since the New Deal. Government spending is the fastest growing segment of our economy.

How come every time you hear about cruel government cuts (such as those to the arts and to PBS), the cry is led by the Democrats? Does this show fiscal responsibility? Do you think the homeless care about PBS or the opera?

We are running deficits here. Why is government supporting something as unnecessary as the opera, classical concerts, and PBS? These are things that are nice to have but they are UNECESSARY to the health of our citizens.

Every time the Republicans call for tax cuts, the Democrats scream. You think this is because they are worried about the deficit? B…S… They have consistently shown that they are worried about having to cut government spending to make up for less tax revenue.

Bush, and the Republicans in Congress, should be ashamed that they haven’t been able to cut the size of government. But every time they try the Democrats scream bloody murder and scare people about unfair and cruel cuts. Their favorite ploy is the guilt trip. It’s pretty sick when you sit back and watch it from a third party perspective.

Name me government programs (besides the military) that that the Democrats have called for large cuts in spending?

You seem to think that the Democrats would do a better job with the economy? The Democrats have shown over and over that they aren’t the right people to reduce government spending. They have shown over and over that they favor raising our taxes.

Please explain your understanding of MacroEconomics and the effect of taxes on an economy. Please explain your understanding of MacroEconomics as it relates to the specific policies that the Democrats will implement to improve the economy. Please explain your understanding of MacroEconomics as it relates to the specific policies that the Democrats have implemented in the past to improve the economy.”

“it is not necessarily always "the good guys vs. the bad guys".

tell that to the "if you dont think like i do, pray like i do, walk, talk, and poop like i do, you hate america" crowd”

“So no one is arguing that the government will take care of 'them' or against responsibility?

You'd never know that from your posts.”

“When was the balanced budget ammendment passed arclite?”

“the balanced budget amendment means nothing if all you have to do is raise taxes to pay the expenses. that's not fiscal responsibility - that's criminal

"Hey, I'll steal from you, but I promise I'll only spend as much as I steal and no more."

Brilliant.”

“arclite, you don't pay taxes..good for you”

“Another question for arclite: Can you tell me how you figure government spending has been reined in after the Republican takeover of Congress in 1995?

See
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1821&sequence=0#table5
or
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1821&sequence=0#table1


Don't waste too much time on the balanced budget ammendment question - it was a trick question.”

“Crash, please actualy read what I wrote: "it is not necessarily always "the good guys vs. the bad guys".

Sometimes it is, I wasn't defending the extremists, right or left. I could have written IT IS the good guys vs. the bad guys, and you're wrong, so you're a bad guy!... but I didn't.

I try not to be an extremist when I write, don't take things out of context & put your own spin on them, please.”

“So no one is arguing that the government will take care of 'them' or against responsibility?

You'd never know that from your posts.”


I'm sorry, but you have a habit of not reading anything except what you want to read.

When I wrote above that I believed in teacing self-sufficiency, you decided that I was against having any social safety net, without knowing were I stood on that issue, and wrote about the individual unable to work, etc. So.... I responded, clarifying my popsition, below is the same comment AGAIN.

So, my question is how could you write this statement " You'd never know that from your posts.”

I anxiously await your reply.




I didn't say that we shouldn't have a very solid "safety net" for those whom misfortune falls upon. I am a huge believer in ensuring that these people don't "fall between the cracks". That is not at all incongruent with believing in the obvious benefits of a free-market system where hard work is rewarded.”

“Do you read your own posts?

"or that they stop creating a permanent undeclass by telling them that "mommy government" will take care of them & they don't have to think about self-responsibility."

- wanderer
3:56:39 PM”

“You are bent on trying to knock down arguments no one has made.”

“Hey Violin I thought you lefties opposed "legislating morality," at least where abortion and gay marriage are concerned. How do you justify using the Bible to support government spending?”

“You must have me confused with someone else.”

“So you believe in legislating morality? Whose morality?

...and I do support government safety nets for the truly needy, disabled, and unfortunate. I just don't like wasteful, one-size-fits-all programs that provide for indigents like Warren Buffett (i.e., Social Security & Medicare for everyone, regardless of income, or disability for drug addicts & alcoholics).”

“I believe that we ought to have laws when one person’s actions impact upon another's life. We ought not to have laws that restrict people's freedoms when their behavior has no impact on others (gay marriage is one). The overlapping situations are the toughies.”

“Do you read your own posts?

"or that they stop creating a permanent undeclass by telling them that "mommy government" will take care of them & they don't have to think about self-responsibility."


Where does that post state that I am against ANY government support where apropriate? Why does everything have to be a pure Black & White scenario for you? Have you no ability to employ common sense or reason... must you always "assume" that a statement is 100% one way or the other... that there is no "middle ground"?

Is it because you're such an extremist in your viewpoints that you can't deal with the fact that others aren't?”

“I disagree that gay marriage has no impact on others, if the marriage entitles them to raise children. I can't help believing that children need both a mother and a father to become "normally" socialized. Maybe being raised by a gay couple is no worse than being raised by a single parent but I don't know why we as a society should give our stamp of approval to something that is less than the ideal.

...and I have no idea what you mean by "overlapping situations."”

“"don't know why we as a society should give our stamp of approval to something that is less than the ideal."

the ideal is parents who teach their children to show respect, not to lie, be fair, cook nutritional meals, spend time, fly kites and ride bikes, pick them up from school, help them with their homework, instill good work ethic, etc. there is not one thing that heterosexual couples can teach a child that homosexual couples cannot

conservatives grumble about moral decline in our youth. obviously, a mostly straight society has not done a bang-up job.

in other words, your so called "ideal families" aint all that flipping ideal”

“There is no scientific data that suggests that a loving couple... both male or both female... cannot raise a perfectly healthy, happy, well adjusted child.

Actually, if you spend much time geting to know a lot of the younger generation, you'll find they laugh at & ridicule the prejudices so routinely exhibited by "older" more conservative, "set-in-their ways" adults. They more readily accept people for who they are, gay, straight, male, female, whatever.

That's a good thing :)”

“"...and I have no idea what you mean by "overlapping situations"

i believe he means situations where the rights of individuals conflict with each other.”

“NOT ALL conservatives CB! Read my next (previous?) post supporting your position.

The point I am trying to drive home on this board so often is that we ALL need to put our broad brushes away... not ALL conservatives believe in living in the dark ages on social issues, just as, I'm sure, not ALL Liberals disagree with helping instill self-responsibility, etc., as a partial solution to some of our societal ills.
last edited: 7/06/05 7:23:32 PM”

“define "normally socialized". there are alot of screwed up people in this world, and most of them come from straight couples. might as well give the gays a chance. they cant screw up any worse than we have.”

“i gotcha, wandy. but your stance on gay marriage disqualifies you as a conservative. maybe you should apply for membership with the libertarian party”

“btw, YOU HATE AMERICA ~sarcasm font~because only true full-on conservatives love america~end sarcasm font

"The point I am trying to drive home on this board so often is that we ALL need to put our broad brushes away... "

that kind of crazy talk has no place in fuego. flame on!”

“Actually I never claimed to be a conservative, when it has come up on this board I've always said I was an independent who leaned right on fiscal issues & leaned left on social issues.

Actually, what I've said many times over the years is that I have founded my own party... open to all, which I've called the "Party of Common Sense".

There aren't many takers. VERY BIG sigh...”

“"Every time the Republicans call for tax cuts, the Democrats scream. You think this is because they are worried about the deficit? B…S… They have consistently shown that they are worried about having to cut government spending to make up for less tax revenue."
arclite

Last two presidents to submit budgets without deficits? LBJ and Clinton. Last surplus: Clinton.

Speculate all you want about who cares about balanced budgets, but the Republicans ain't been delivering 'em, the Democrats are.
last edited: 7/06/05 9:12:09 PM”

“Big headlines in California today... Governor Terminator (G) and the Democratic horde that have controlled CA for decades reached a budget accord.. everyone compromised a little, no tax increases, no radical budget cuts that the Dems couldn't accommodate... we actually made a litle progress. Unfortunately, we're still spending way more than we take in so will have to step up to that in the near future, but at least there's progress. This from the most socialistic, democrat-controlled state in the Union!

If we can work together here, we can work together anywhere!”

“You’re absolutely right, violin. The Balanced Budget Amendment was never passed. The Democrats saw to that. The Democrats are good at that. They’ve managed to water down Social Security reform without actually proposing any concrete ideas of their own. They are the party of fiscal responsibility?



This is the wording of the Balanced Budget Amendment to which the Democrats complained:

“The budget deficit as measured at the end of each year should be smaller each year than it was in the previous year, or the budget should be balanced.

When the measured budget deficit goes up instead of down, a clock starts ticking. Within six years, the budget must be balanced.

If the six years pass, and the budget does not come into balance, then all members of the House and Senate who served in each of the six years while the clock was ticking must stand down at the end of their current term, and may not run for office or serve in any capacity as a government employee, lobbyist, consultant, etc. for a period of one year after their term expires. “

Talk about taking away his meal ticket in government “service” and watch a Democrat squirm.


Show me where I said “government spending has been reined in after the Republican takeover of Congress in 1995?” I eagerly await your reply.




Pedxing, let’s go over this again for the economically challenged: Which branch of government is responsible for submitting the budget?




By forcing business to comply with their regulations, Democrats often slow economic growth while increasing the size of government.

Democrat benefits bills would overload businesses
Cary Condotta

Washington has the highest minimum wage in the nation. We have the nation's only tax on gross business income -- so even if we end up in the red, we still pay tax on money we never had in our pockets. If we buy medical insurance for our employees, state law mandates it must cover 47 types of services, leaving us with no way to buy a tailored and affordable plan covering only services our employees want and need.

But it's about to get worse. Much worse. Because Democrat-sponsored job-killer bills are making their way through the Legislature. If they become law, your business -- or your employer's business, and by extension, your job -- is in the cross-hairs.

One of the biggest disasters-in-waiting is the so-called "pay or play" legislation. House Bill 1702 (and companion Senate Bill 5637) works this way: Every business with 50 or more employees would be forced to provide health insurance for their employees ("play") or be taxed a fee ("pay"). The state would use the fee to expand Washington's government-run health care system, the Basic Health Plan.

Imagine you're a business owner with 65 employees. Gotcha! This tax just added almost $15,000 to your monthly expenses. What if you won't -- or can't -- pay the tax? The 200 percent penalty now brings your monthly tax bill to $30,000.

The Democrats try to convince us that regulating business protects the consumer. Do you dispute this?




Regulations enacted by Democrats often put a large burden on small business.

Regulation Nation
How can government ease the regulatory burdens that are crushing entrepreneurs?
Entrepreneur magazine - October 2004
By Joshua Kurlantzick

For many entrepreneurs, the heavy burden of federal regulation has become a significant factor limiting their growth. In fact, the SBA's Office of Advocacy has estimated that, for small companies with fewer than 20 employees, regulatory burdens cost nearly $7,000 per employee, per year.

The Democrats try to convince us that they are the party of “the working man.” Only in large cities do the lower middle class consistently vote for Democrats. Most of “the working men” where I work vote Republican. Management leans more towards the Democrats. Many of their policies actually hurt “the working man” by creating a larger tax burden. Social Security favors the middle class at the expense of both the rich and the poor.




Democrats have opposed free trade more often than Republicans.

Published on Sunday, January 2, 2005 by the Los Angeles Times
Democrats Split Again Over Party's Agenda
Liberals and centrists trading magazine salvos reopen disputes on the war and economics. The debate could affect the next presidential race.
by Ronald Brownstein

"During the 1990s, many liberals felt that Clinton abandoned class-conscious themes by supporting the North American Free Trade Agreement and a balanced federal budget."

It has been shown that large government creates loss of liberty. It has been shown that free trade raises the standard of living of a population much better than government controlled economies.




Democrats champion the idea of forcing business to be more “socially responsible” through legislation.

California Considers Corporate Responsibility Law
08-Jan-04
Corporate regulation

"A bold proposal to make California companies more socially responsible is scheduled to receive a hearing in the California Senate Judiciary Committee. The Bill, called the Directors Duties bill or the Code for Corporate Responsibility (SB 917), would broaden the duties of corporate directors to include protecting the public interest in five specific areas: 1) environment; 2) human rights; 3) public health and safety; 4) dignity of employees; and 5) the welfare of the communities in which the corporation operates. Under current law, corporate directors are only legally responsible to act in the best interests of the corporation and its shareholders, which generally requires them to maximize financial profits. This narrow focus on financial profit is the source of much of the harmful behaviors in which corporations engage. By making directors more responsible for other aspects of the public interests, corporations will become more socially responsible."…

This is a control freak mentality. It is government control of the economy.




Failed leftist governments:

USSR, North Korea

These governments have shown that control over the economy, by large government, creates poor economic conditions for the population.




Improvement through free trade:

Chili, India, China

These countries have shown that by moving towards free markets and less government control, the standard of living of the citizens always improves.





Powerhouse:

Hong Kong

Hong Kong is about as close to a free trade nation as there is. Their economy has been amazing.




Comparison:

Europe has higher taxes and more social programs than the U.S. Compare Europe’s economic growth with the U.S. over the past few years. Compare the unemployment figures between Europe and the U.S.




How many examples do you need to see Chili? Even a basic understanding of economics shows that low taxes and free markets are the best way to improve the standard of living. Democrats are less inclined than Republicans to endorse these strategies.

Have you read Adam Smith? Have you read Milton Friedman?
last edited: 7/07/05 4:22:52 PM”

“Vote for the man & his idea's. Perhaps for how he has voted previously. Vote for the voice of reason regardless of party affiliation.”

“not to jump in here uninvited but you can always come up with stats to prove your point, right or wrong, left or right. Time we came back together and started being smart solid people again, All this bashing each side, How does it help. Let's move on and stop being so polorized, most of us are hikers here and I hiked with a few of ya, and always had a great time maybe we should invade the capitol. just my 2 cents have a great day”

“No shlt. I get so tired of the team mentality on both sides. No one can give an inch either way. It’s stupid and completely unproductive. On the other hand I think this makes for fertile ground for a third party candidate to come up with a positive and solid plan and really put some fear in the big two parties. As long as Billery isn’t running in 2008 I’ll vote third party. Probably libertarian as long as they aren't one of the extreme libertarians.”

“GOOD FOR YOU, NIGAL!!!

I think discussion of specific issues is important. Criticism of specific issues favored by one party or another is not “team mentality.” I agree that people who think their “team” can do no wrong, and the other “teams” can do no right, are pretty sad excuses for thinking creatures.

I also don’t understand how people can line up for any issue, before they even begin to examine the facts and repercussions, just because their party proposed the idea. Again, I believe these are pretty sad excuses for thinking creatures.

I have changed my opinions about a number of issues over the years. Discussion, with presentation of facts and figures, helps me to examine my beliefs. Although we need to be careful about what we read into statistics, we also need to be careful not to dismiss statistics, out of hand, just because they disagree with our preconceived ideas.”