|
Post by leon on Nov 4, 2013 9:34:51 GMT -5
I wonder if the disparity of monies given to Republicans vs Democrats is due to the size and relative wealth of groups endorsing those parties?
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Nov 4, 2013 10:10:43 GMT -5
Great. Now that we've established that Bush's good intentions didn't pan out as expected (nor has any other social program before or after), can we agree that maybe the government shouldn't be trying to help individuals? At least not beyond providing a level playing field? The problem with the economy doesn't have anything to do with borrowing for the Iraq war. In fact, the Iraq war wasn't even a particularly large government expenditure. Direct spending by DoD on the war was under $1 trillion. TARP, by itself, was more expensive. There is an estimate from Brown University that put the total cost of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan at $6 trillion through 2050. That includes all the interest on the debt, and caring for injured soldiers. The problem with the economy was Fannie-Mae and Freddie-Mac demanding banks lend mortgage money to people who would never be able to repay it, which caused a housing bubble that collapsed in 2008. This was followed up with the Obama Administration passing Obamacare, and Dodd-Frank which both added significant burdens on the economy in general, and the labor market specifically. And that has prevented the recovery from the housing market bubble bursting. Seems to me- regardless of party, this is a solid argument for-- Smaller Government. Which is the odd thing about EY's statement about W. not doing enough for individuals. It's not as though Bush didn't TRY to improve the average person's lot in life. It's just that every time the government does something like that... whether it's Medicare Part D, or Obamacare, it almost universally makes things worse. And relatively speaking Part D works MUCH better than Obamacare ever will. Even with the donut hole.
|
|
|
Post by Moses on Nov 4, 2013 12:51:19 GMT -5
Seems to me- regardless of party, this is a solid argument for-- Smaller Government. Which is the odd thing about EY's statement about W. not doing enough for individuals. It's not as though Bush didn't TRY to improve the average person's lot in life. It's just that every time the government does something like that... whether it's Medicare Part D, or Obamacare, it almost universally makes things worse. And relatively speaking Part D works MUCH better than Obamacare ever will. Even with the donut hole. I'm voting you most partisan poster of the week.
|
|
|
Post by Moses on Nov 4, 2013 12:52:40 GMT -5
W TRIED to improve everyone's life......
Bwahahaha. Yeah that uneccessary war was awesome.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2013 21:51:42 GMT -5
Seems to me- regardless of party, this is a solid argument for-- Smaller Government. Which is the odd thing about EY's statement about W. not doing enough for individuals. It's not as though Bush didn't TRY to improve the average person's lot in life. It's just that every time the government does something like that... whether it's Medicare Part D, or Obamacare, it almost universally makes things worse. And relatively speaking Part D works MUCH better than Obamacare ever will. Even with the donut hole. Agreed- economics is an extremely complicated system, as much art as science, mathematics and psychology. Every attempt to control it with pure "science"-- which was communism- has failed. When government intervenes in one way, it too often inadvertently triggers something else. Folks react to economics, often in selfish ways-- this is something Obamacare has failed to account for.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2013 21:52:57 GMT -5
Which is the odd thing about EY's statement about W. not doing enough for individuals. It's not as though Bush didn't TRY to improve the average person's lot in life. It's just that every time the government does something like that... whether it's Medicare Part D, or Obamacare, it almost universally makes things worse. And relatively speaking Part D works MUCH better than Obamacare ever will. Even with the donut hole. I'm voting you most partisan poster of the week. Wow, coming from someone was completely neutral and unbiased as yourself, that really means a lot.....
|
|
|
Post by Moses on Nov 4, 2013 21:57:48 GMT -5
But I wasn't talking to you. Are You guys really lthis close, that you have to take their side when you see one of your buddies losing an argument? spooky. PS-a bit heavy on in the emicons. They're not that effective.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Nov 4, 2013 21:58:29 GMT -5
Oh, is moses still here? I decided to block him when I realized it was just jed again, and that he will never, ever post anything worth reading.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2013 21:59:47 GMT -5
But I wasn't talking to you. Are You guys really lthis close, that you have to take their side when you see one of your buddies losing an argument? spooky. That was an argument?? If you don't like being called out on razzing someone-- don't razz them!!
|
|
|
Post by Moses on Nov 4, 2013 22:01:07 GMT -5
But I wasn't talking to you. Are You guys really lthis close, that you have to take their side when you see one of your buddies losing an argument? spooky. That was an argument?? If you don't like being called out on razzing someone-- don't razz them!! So I was right.
|
|
|
Post by Moses on Nov 4, 2013 22:01:26 GMT -5
But I wasn't talking to you. Are You guys really lthis close, that you have to take their side when you see one of your buddies losing an argument? spooky. That was an argument?? If you don't like being called out on razzing someone-- don't razz them!! So I was right.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2013 22:01:58 GMT -5
That was an argument?? If you don't like being called out on razzing someone-- don't razz them!! So I was right. Yep- you were called out.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Nov 4, 2013 22:04:52 GMT -5
Which is the odd thing about EY's statement about W. not doing enough for individuals. It's not as though Bush didn't TRY to improve the average person's lot in life. It's just that every time the government does something like that... whether it's Medicare Part D, or Obamacare, it almost universally makes things worse. And relatively speaking Part D works MUCH better than Obamacare ever will. Even with the donut hole. Agreed- economics is an extremely complicated system, as much art as science, mathematics and psychology. Every attempt to control it with pure "science"-- which was communism- has failed. When government intervenes in one way, it too often inadvertently triggers something else. Folks react to economics, often in selfish ways-- this is something Obamacare has failed to account for. Exactly right. Playing with the larger economy is a little like having a balloon. Squeeze in one place, and it'll bulge somewhere else. Squeeze too hard and it'll pop. And it tends to do best when it's squeezed as little as possible. For every action there is a reaction. The larger the action, the bigger the reaction. And that's why "Comprehensive" legislation like Obamacare has resulted in such a massive tide of unintended consequences. The only way health care reform will work and be successful is to repeal the big law with all of the crazy consequences, and follow it up with small incremental changes so that the system has time to absorb and react to it. And the people making the changes can understand what the reactions are before unbalancing the system further.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2013 22:08:37 GMT -5
Agreed- economics is an extremely complicated system, as much art as science, mathematics and psychology. Every attempt to control it with pure "science"-- which was communism- has failed. When government intervenes in one way, it too often inadvertently triggers something else. Folks react to economics, often in selfish ways-- this is something Obamacare has failed to account for. Exactly right. Playing with the larger economy is a little like having a balloon. Squeeze in one place, and it'll bulge somewhere else. Squeeze too hard and it'll pop. And it tends to do best when it's squeezed as little as possible. For every action there is a reaction. The larger the action, the bigger the reaction. And that's why "Comprehensive" legislation like Obamacare has resulted in such a massive tide of unintended consequences. The only way health care reform will work and be successful is to repeal the big law with all of the crazy consequences, and follow it up with small incremental changes so that the system has time to absorb and react to it. And the people making the changes can understand what the reactions are before unbalancing the system further. Agreed! Those things that most people, myself included, did not like-- such as denial based on pre-existing conditions, were cruel - but there for a real economic reason. To balance that out takes careful planning, and incremental changes--- test that balloon out, see what happens when you squeeze one spot, can you balance it out elsewhere?? Otherwise, you can pop the whole d@mn thing.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Nov 4, 2013 22:14:17 GMT -5
Exactly right. Playing with the larger economy is a little like having a balloon. Squeeze in one place, and it'll bulge somewhere else. Squeeze too hard and it'll pop. And it tends to do best when it's squeezed as little as possible. For every action there is a reaction. The larger the action, the bigger the reaction. And that's why "Comprehensive" legislation like Obamacare has resulted in such a massive tide of unintended consequences. The only way health care reform will work and be successful is to repeal the big law with all of the crazy consequences, and follow it up with small incremental changes so that the system has time to absorb and react to it. And the people making the changes can understand what the reactions are before unbalancing the system further. Agreed! Those things that most people, myself included, did not like-- such as denial based on pre-existing conditions, were cruel - but there for a real economic reason. To balance that out takes careful planning, and incremental changes--- test that balloon out, see what happens when you squeeze one spot, can you balance it out elsewhere?? Otherwise, you can pop the whole d@mn thing. And here's the thing, you can twist and manipulate a balloon to make it look like a giraffe. But only if you do it in a step-by-step way and carefully. What Obamacare does is try to make the balloon into a giraffe in one single ultra-complicated step. Hence the balloon has popped.
|
|
|
Post by Moses on Nov 4, 2013 22:17:30 GMT -5
Agreed! Those things that most people, myself included, did not like-- such as denial based on pre-existing conditions, were cruel - but there for a real economic reason. To balance that out takes careful planning, and incremental changes--- test that balloon out, see what happens when you squeeze one spot, can you balance it out elsewhere?? Otherwise, you can pop the whole d@mn thing. And here's the thing, you can twist and manipulate a balloon to make it look like a giraffe. But only if you do it in a step-by-step way and carefully. What Obamacare does is try to make the balloon into a giraffe in one single ultra-complicated step. Hence the balloon has popped. Balloons! Giraffes! Now we're getting to the crux of it all. I love this deep and serious talk.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2013 22:19:54 GMT -5
Agreed! Those things that most people, myself included, did not like-- such as denial based on pre-existing conditions, were cruel - but there for a real economic reason. To balance that out takes careful planning, and incremental changes--- test that balloon out, see what happens when you squeeze one spot, can you balance it out elsewhere?? Otherwise, you can pop the whole d@mn thing. And here's the thing, you can twist and manipulate a balloon to make it look like a giraffe. But only if you do it in a step-by-step way and carefully. What Obamacare does is try to make the balloon into a giraffe in one single ultra-complicated step. Hence the balloon has popped. Hence the suspicion-- his goal was to pop it all along. To replace it with a single-payer system. But I have to wonder-- if government screwed up this bad with plan one, will people really be stupid enough to trust them with even greater control??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2013 22:20:44 GMT -5
Oh, is moses still here? I decided to block him when I realized it was just jed again, and that he will never, ever post anything worth reading. Poster child for 50 years of continuous drug abuse.. best let it go in one ear and out the other just like the ego asswipe.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Nov 4, 2013 22:22:33 GMT -5
And here's the thing, you can twist and manipulate a balloon to make it look like a giraffe. But only if you do it in a step-by-step way and carefully. What Obamacare does is try to make the balloon into a giraffe in one single ultra-complicated step. Hence the balloon has popped. Hence the suspicion-- his goal was to pop it all along. To replace it with a single-payer system. But I have to wonder-- if government screwed up this bad with plan one, will people really be stupid enough to trust them with even greater control?? Well, clearly most liberals will be. They trust the government to do everything except fight wars... the main thing it was crated to do. The thing of it is though, I think for the average person, Obamacare has failed too spectacularly. It is one thing for the balloon to stretch first and only pop after it some time has passed. This one burst before they even started putting air in it.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Nov 4, 2013 22:23:57 GMT -5
Oh, is moses still here? I decided to block him when I realized it was just jed again, and that he will never, ever post anything worth reading. Poster child for 50 years of continuous drug abuse.. best let it go in one ear and out the other just like the ego asswipe. Drug abuse or heavy liberal programming. Come to think of it, both pretty much produce the same result.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2013 22:24:29 GMT -5
Hence the suspicion-- his goal was to pop it all along. To replace it with a single-payer system. But I have to wonder-- if government screwed up this bad with plan one, will people really be stupid enough to trust them with even greater control?? Well, clearly most liberals will be. They trust the government to do everything except fight wars... the main thing it was crated to do. The thing of it is though, I think for the average person, Obamacare has failed too spectacularly. It is one thing for the balloon to stretch first and only pop after it some time has passed. This one burst before they even started putting air in it. If the Repubs don't shoot themselves in the foot (Quick-- disarm Cheney!! 2014 could so easily be theirs.
|
|
|
Post by Moses on Nov 4, 2013 22:26:19 GMT -5
Well, clearly most liberals will be. They trust the government to do everything except fight wars... the main thing it was crated to do. The thing of it is though, I think for the average person, Obamacare has failed too spectacularly. It is one thing for the balloon to stretch first and only pop after it some time has passed. This one burst before they even started putting air in it. If the Repubs don't shoot themselves in the foot (Quick-- disarm Cheney!! 2014 could so easily be theirs. I thought you weren't a Republican
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2013 22:27:47 GMT -5
If the Repubs don't shoot themselves in the foot (Quick-- disarm Cheney!! 2014 could so easily be theirs. I thought you weren't a Republican I'm a Libertarian. On this issue, I'm solidly with the Republicans.
|
|
|
Post by Moses on Nov 4, 2013 22:31:20 GMT -5
I thought you weren't a Republican I'm a Libertarian. On this issue, I'm solidly with the Republicans. Dude everything you say is solidly with the Republicans. There are no libertarians. In Alaska we have libertarians everywhere. And they elect Republicans. Ha ha ha I really sometimes get the idea you people have no clue of anything that you're talking about. Period
|
|
|
Post by Moses on Nov 4, 2013 22:32:07 GMT -5
I'm a libertarian the votes Republican all the time. LOL
|
|