patrick.net

Honest Abe says

I don’t have the time necessary (I’m at work). So I’ll just start out with three:
(1) Put an immediate cap on all spending.

I agree. Lets start with the military.

(2) Stop inflating and devaluing the dollar.

Already done.

(3) Privatize failing government programs.

Already done. Why do you think there are so many mercenaries being employed in Afghanistan?

marcus says

I know Ray disagrees about Ford, but we had that argument before. I and others showed him quotes right and left, and data, but he put his fingers in his ears and said, “I can’t hear you la la la la la la la la la la.” And then he repeated a few more times that the government didn’t bail Ford out).

The Gray Lady disagrees with Marcus. One Lib source against another Lib source. Who is right? The New York Times or Marcus? LOL

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/ford_motor_company/index.html

marcus says

So, yeah, I guess when American car companies are totally back up and doing great, you and Ray can talk about how there shouldn’t be any American car companies anymore, except for the branches of Toyota, Honda, Hyunda, etc.

Never said that and neither did Abe, so the question is, why are you lying?

Honest Abe says

The federal government has no business being in the railroad/people transportation business (Amtrak)

Interesting, should the government also get out of subsidizing the highway and air travel business? How about the internet business? How about electricity? Or is it only the things you don't personally use that the government should get out of?

Kevin - OMG, what factual information do you have that shows the government is NOT inflating our currency and devaluing the dollar? There is no such information. and you are simply WRONG.

Next, what factual information do you have that shows the government is privatizing failing government businesses?

You simply don't understand the difference between "privatize"and "socialize". Why not look them up? I also recommend you go to these sites: Dollar Collapse and 321 Gold. Look around and read a variety of the posts - you'll learn a lot.

BoB - "Centralization of the means of TRANSPORTATION in the hands of the State" is part of the COMMUNIST MANEFISTO. How can you denounce communism and support it at the same time? I know the answer - you sir, and those like you, support socialism, communism, the nanny state, soft tyranny, the road to serfdom, and government control of everything.

If you owned a rental house that lost money each and every month wouldn't you want to sell the house to end the losses? Or are you just stupid?

What you cannot accept is the fact that honest, hardworking taxpayers should NOT BE FORCED by the government to support ANY failing business. Government force - against the will of the people - is tyranny.

RayAmerica says

The Gray Lady disagrees with Marcus. One Lib source against another Lib source. Who is right? The New York Times or Marcus? LOL

Wow, you found an article about Ford. You've gotten pretty good with this whole internet usage Ray.

I'm not going to repeat an argument we had before. Besides for you arguing is all about not hearing what the other person says anyway.

RayAmerica says

Never said that and neither did Abe, so the question is, why are you lying?

Not going to try to help you understand how logic works either. You've made it quite clear that it's not your thing. But for the other readers:

When Abe and Ray object to government temporarily involving itself in business, including bailouts of Chrysler and GM, this is no different than saying that you don't want any American car companies to exist anymore.

marcus says

When Abe and Ray object to government temporarily involving itself in business, including bailouts of Chrysler and GM, this is no different than saying that you don’t want any American car companies to exist anymore.

Funny little thing I noticed; you didn't include "Ford" in your bailout comment. I guess you're beginning to see the light. There's hope for everyone. LOL !

Honest Abe says

Kevin - OMG, what factual information do you have that shows the government is NOT inflating our currency and devaluing the dollar? There is no such information. and you are simply WRONG.
Next, what factual information do you have that shows the government is privatizing failing government businesses?
You simply don’t understand the difference between “privatize”and “socialize”. Why not look them up? I also recommend you go to these sites: Dollar Collapse and 321 Gold. Look around and read a variety of the posts - you’ll learn a lot.
BoB - “Centralization of the means of TRANSPORTATION in the hands of the State” is part of the COMMUNIST MANEFISTO. How can you denounce communism and support it at the same time? I know the answer - you sir, and those like you, support socialism, communism, the nanny state, soft tyranny, the road to serfdom, and government control of everything.
If you owned a rental house that lost money each and every month wouldn’t you want to sell the house to end the losses? Or are you just stupid?
What you cannot accept is the fact that honest, hardworking taxpayers should NOT BE FORCED by the government to support ANY failing business. Government force - against the will of the people - is tyranny.

Inflation is near zero right now.

Most medicare and military spending goes to private companies.
Socialism is government ownership of resources. You can argue that our ownership of gm is socialist. Paying privat military contractors is not socialism, its just fucked up.

Oh, and I do agree that the corporate welfare that we give to military contractors and health care providers in the form of medicare I outrageous.

Its absurd to cry foul over loans made to gm while ignoring the trillions going to defense contractors and doctors though.

RayAmerica says

Funny little thing I noticed; you didn’t include “Ford” in your bailout comment

I never said that the government bailed Ford out. I only said that Ford very likely would have gone under if the government hadn't bailed out GM and the parts suppliers. This is common knowledge that is accepted by all. Note I didn't say Ford definitely would have gone under. That can't be known. Only that there is a very good chance that it would have.

This was argued to death in another thread. Actually I and others made the case. Ray just repeated over and over that the government didn't bail out Ford. He never did, and probably won't now address whether or not the bailout indirectly may have saved Ford.

APOCALYPSEFUCK says

It is clear.

We need to know what you're smoking so that we can see your "clarity." It's not so clear when we're sober.

APOCALYPSEFUCK says

It is clear.
The time for the end of this experiment in stalinism to end is long past.
Cut taxes to zero.
Dismiss all government workers.
Plant potatoes.

I like the cut of your jib. Promoting potatoes is the clincher.

I'LL SEE YOU IN H-E-DOUBLE-HOCKEY-STICKS!

APOCALYPSEFUCK says

It is clear.
The time for the end of this experiment in stalinism to end is long past.
Cut taxes to zero.
Dismiss all government workers.
Plant potatoes.

You know who else planted potatoes? The soviets.

Real capitalists subsist entirely on meat slaughtered with our own bare hands.

I've been on both sides of the fence. I grew up in a strictly democratic family. My father was a union rep. for Chrysler Corp. I was a union member and government employee for close to 10 years...UNTIL I CAME TO MY SENSES.

Big "Government", centralized planning, liberal "mentality", socialized insecurity, the nanny state, mis-alocation of resources, theft by inflation, massive financial irresponsibility, over-regulation of whats becoming every aspect of our lives doesn't paint a very pretty picture for America's future.

It has destroyed our currency, caused massive national debt, decimiated peoples wealth and savings, created road-blocks to competition, crushed peoples confidence in our politicians...and a whole lot more. 1984 - here we come.

Honest Abe says

I’ve been on both sides of the fence

But you're all about bias, not intelligent analysis. Otherwise you would be aware of how far your fence has moved to the right. And you wouldn't need to fit all the complexities and all the problems into one simplistic: uh liberals bad, uh uh republicans good. Me angry.

Read this Abe: http://patrick.net/?p=540890

marcus says

uh liberals bad, uh uh republicans good. Me angry.

ummmmmmm, freedom fries!

Marcus, you got some of my points correct. Lib's, democrats, socialists, progressives, communists, nanny staters, the "its not fair" crowd, the "lets spend America into oblivion" crowd , the "lets level the playing field" crowd, the "forget opportunity - lets make the results equal for everyone" crowd = bad. Republicans = not much better. Freedom and liberty = GOOD.

In America we've evolved from the two party system into the TWO PARTY - ONE PARTY system. In other words, there's not much difference between them. One is terrible for our freedom and liberty, the other one is not much better. The servent has become the master. And big, massive, parasitic, interventionist, empire building, ever growing government is not the answer. It getting pretty obvious that its the problem.

Ron Paul.com
Its not the corporations that are the problem. Its the government which allows and encourages it. The government wants the corruption to continue to get the "payola" in order to win elections. Follow the money.

Honest Abe says

in America we’ve evolved from the two party system into the TWO PARTY - ONE PARTY system. In other words, there’s not much difference between them.

I agree. Where we disagree is on which party is worse. Your constant anti liberal message misses the point that republicans are far worse. They will spend just as much or more (with SLIGHTLY different priorities) but they will endlessly take care of the rich and corporations at the expense of future generations.

Abe, I just get tired of a message about liberals that is a lie. Okay, so liberals are more socially conscious. It's a difference in priorities, and it's not that significant.

Tell me this Abe. Hypothetical question: If the only choice is between tax and spend versus borrow and spend, where the spending is for the same amount (for the sake of argument say that the spending is on the same things (I know that's asking too much that you let go of that for a minute)),

Then which would you prefer ?

Which would be better for our future ?

Which would be more likely to motivate getting spending under control ?

I would argue tax and spend is better than borrow and spend. And furthermore, I would argue that if it is very progressive, with high incomes taxed much more than they are now, then we would magically get spending under control.

(please notice there are no straw men here, just a simple logical question, please dont answer with all the bs about how I am for a nanny state. that's changing the subject and it's a lie)

Why don't we temporarily take the top tax rate up to about 60% until spending is brought under control. Bring the tax rates back down when we are running true surplussed again.

Most of the people who impact spending decisions are in the higher tax brackets.

If we did this single thing, and also some very serious campaign finance reform, I say America could be truly great again.

If we were (or are) a real democracy, then this should be possible.

all things the same, tax and spend is better than borrow and spend.

taxes used to transfer wealth to unproductive/lazy/unlucky people, is bad

taxes used to buy big guns and bullets to protect all Americans, is good

Kevin says

You know who else planted potatoes?

I did not know that. I thought a key element of Stalinist purges was starvation.
But these people apparently liked potatoes too:

Well, it's clear the lower income, under-educated, indentured voters tend to believe the mainstream media and liberal bias. The dependent class, do-gooders, liberals and the like haven't learned to read between the lies, nor do they want to. It might stop their socialistic, dependent, government "do it for me - because I can't do it for myself" agenda.

I used to be a dues paying, unionized, lazy, democratic government worker...for nearly 10 years...until I wised up. I invested a lot of time reading, talking, listening, comparing, analyzing. The lessons in "The Millionaire Next Door", "Think and Grow Rich", "The Secret" "The Richest Man in Babylon" all support opportunity, self-reliance, personal responsibility, living within one's means, having a positive attitude of gratitude, and the like.

It became pretty clear, pretty quick that the positive things I learned were the exact opposite of what government teaches...which is dependency, loss of freedom, privatizing profits but socializing losses, reckless fiscal policy, class warfare, thought crimes, theft by inflation, larger government, new taxes, more union support, more affirmative action, more abortion, less oil, less free enterprise, more predatory lawyers, producers get penalized, new government bureaucracies with new government Czars, more liberal judges, loss of individual rights, more welfare, more job-killing business regulation, decreased productivity, more bad changes.

In other words: Have less - pay more. All for the common good, of course. No one with even half a brain would support that kind of vision for America - unless you're either a socialist - or brain damaged. And there you have it.

Honest Abe says

Well, it’s clear the lower income, under-educated, indentured voters tend to believe the mainstream media and liberal bias. The dependent class, do-gooders, liberals and the like haven’t learned to read between the lies, nor do they want to. It might stop their socialistic, dependent, government “do it for me - because I can’t do it for myself” agenda.

Let's leave my family out of this, young man!

Honest Abe says

Well, it’s clear the lower income, under-educated, indentured voters tend to believe the mainstream media and liberal bias. The dependent class, do-gooders, liberals and the like haven’t learned to read between the lies, nor do they want to. It might stop their socialistic, dependent, government “do it for me - because I can’t do it for myself” agenda.
I used to be a dues paying, unionized, lazy, democratic government worker…for nearly 10 years…until I wised up. I invested a lot of time reading, talking, listening, comparing, analyzing. The lessons in “The Millionaire Next Door”, “Think and Grow Rich”, “The Secret” “The Richest Man in Babylon” all support opportunity, self-reliance, personal responsibility, living within one’s means, having a positive attitude of gratitude, and the like.
It became pretty clear, pretty quick that the positive things I learned were the exact opposite of what government teaches…which is dependency, loss of freedom, privatizing profits but socializing losses, reckless fiscal policy, class warfare, thought crimes, theft by inflation, larger government, new taxes, more union support, more affirmative action, more abortion, less oil, less free enterprise, more predatory lawyers, producers get penalized, new government bureaucracies with new government Czars, more liberal judges, loss of individual rights, more welfare, more job-killing business regulation, decreased productivity, more bad changes.
In other words: Have less - pay more. All for the common good, of course. No one with even half a brain would support that kind of vision for America - unless you’re either a socialist - or brain damaged. And there you have it.

Anyone who takes advice from the secret is beyond hope.

Abe. You and the Tea party were a match made in heaven.

Elliemae, hahaha - thats a good one. Actually I was thinking about one of my relatives. BTW, you're not related to Fanniemae, are you?

Marcus - you said "anyone who takes advice from the secret is beyond hope". Really? Some of the concepts in The Secret are very similar to those of "The Power of Positive Thinking", "Think and Grow Rich", "The Magic of Thinking Big", "Tough Times Never Last but Tough People Do", and many others. But being the liberal that you are you wouldn't know anything about those things. No problem, I understand, it simply defines who you are. Yuck.

Honest Abe says

But being the liberal that you are you wouldn’t know anything about those things. No problem, I understand, it simply defines who you are. Yuck.

At least I'm aware of who I'm talking to (sort of). Maybe you've been practicing "think and become drunk ?" You are one serious piece of work, Abe or whoever you are.

Honest Abe says

Elliemae, hahaha - thats a good one. Actually I was thinking about one of my relatives. BTW, you’re not related to Fanniemae, are you?
Marcus - you said “anyone who takes advice from the secret is beyond hope”. Really? Some of the concepts in The Secret are very similar to those of “The Power of Positive Thinking”, “Think and Grow Rich”, “The Magic of Thinking Big”, “Tough Times Never Last but Tough People Do”, and many others. But being the liberal that you are you wouldn’t know anything about those things. No problem, I understand, it simply defines who you are. Yuck.

I'm not Marcus so I don't know what he thinks.

I do know that I'm a successful person, and I didn't need any motivational woo-woo to become that way, and I think it's kind of pathetic that anyone would listen to that kind of pseudo scientific bullshit.

Honest Abe says

it simply defines who you are. Yuck

Abe. Any inferences you make about my work ethic, my values and such should be based on what I say in this forum. That's all you can know about me.

Everyone knows about the strange one dimensional boob that you portray yourself to be. I don't even think that it's possible that you are the way you portray yourself to be.

About those "create your reality" books. I don't care to read them, but I think there is something to it. People have talked about the importance of beliefs and attitude for eons in one way or another. Neuroscience is a hot topic now, with some new twists on the same ideas.

I'm reminded of how mothers used to say, don't hold your eyes that way (cross eyed) they might stay that way. Certain brain patterns that arise in alcoholism and addiction probably do cause changes in hard wiring. Same for the victim personality. Sure there's something to that. So ?

But Abe. Lecture yourself, not us. And try to change your habitual rewiring of your own brain with the obsessive generalizations about liberals. Maybe consider talking to a professional.

I should talk to a professional? You're the one with psychopathological brain damage. And you're in denial on top of it. Furthermore, you're a liberal democrat - the party of food stamps and dependency. Its completly obvious you don't need no stupid self-help, "create your reality" books. Help us out here, what books do you read? Or is the answer "NONE".

In reality, you are everything you accuse me of being.

Honest Abe says

Elliemae, hahaha - thats a good one. Actually I was thinking about one of my relatives. BTW, you’re not related to Fanniemae, are you?

No, my relatives were real people and not a government created entity. :)

Honest Abe says

In reality, you are everything you accuse me of being

If that were true I would write a long laundry list of everything I think is wrong in our country and say it was all the fault of people like you.

It's true that there is something about your posts Abe that pushes my buttons. I think the very style and underlying theme are passive aggressive, or maybe it's just aggressive, but then that's the intent. Where as most people on here are talking about something specific, and often sharing interesting insights, even if they are politically far from where I'm at.

Anyway, I feel bad about getting kind of mean with you on more than one occasion, so in the interest of not doing that anymore, I am going to try out one of Patrick's new features.

The problem with socialism is that it’s mostly socialism for the very rich.

RayAmerica says

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-05/food-stamp-recipients-at-record-41-8-million-americans-in-july-u-s-says.html

And all those food stamps _together_ cost about $56 billion per year, which is nothing compared to the first $700 billion bailout for bankers, or the next bailout, or the next one.

Not to mention the effect of taxing billionaires at 15% (because almost all their income is dividends and capital gains) while working people pay 28% on actual work. Why don't they pay 28% while workers pay 15%?

And all those food stamps _together_ cost about $56 billion per year

Unfortunately our obligations don't end with "food stamps." For a more detailed account of our entitlement obligations, check this out:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Factsheets/Heading-for-a-10000-Foot-Cliff-Why-Budget-Process-Reform-is-Needed-Now

I haven't been reading this since Friday... seems like I've missed a bit.

Noticed this item in the news yesterday and it seemed apropos for this thread: "Firefighters Watch As Home Burns: Gene Cranick's House Destroyed In Tennessee Over $75 Fee"
http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/Firefighters-watch-as-home-burns-to-the-ground-104052668.html

Just a tragedy of heartbreaking proportions and mind boggling stupidity and callousness, and it strikes me that this is the kind of world Abe and Giggles would take us to.

Honest Abe says

a liberal democrat - the party of food stamps and dependency.

Actually... the economy almost always does better under democratic rule. Its sad but its a fact. This notion that Republicans are the better money managers policy-wise is a myth, here's one set of charts, the only link I can be bothered to dig up at the moment: http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts .

But of course we could demonstrate this till the cows come and it wouldn't have any bearing on your discussion, and anyway I think we're talking at odds aren't we? You're not talking about making the economy work better for all, creating stable systems, reducing crime, bettering education etc, you're talking about being able to hoard up in your little hole and keep all of what you think is purely yours.

EDIT

The problem with socialism is that it’s mostly socialism for the very rich. Why do we keep taxing the common people to bail out failed bankers?

Thats not socialism. In fact its exactly the opposite.

shrekgrinch says

The military is 20% of the total budget. Of course, it would figure you would use the ‘ginned up’ budget the omits entitlement spending.

Come on. You are not that naive, are you? The military is almost certainly 50%+.

Thats basically the latest budget concept from the Republicans.