Say Anything Blog

Oh I don’t think he’s stopping there either.

How much will it cost in lost revenue as more and more people decide there is no reason to work.

I can’t tell you the number of people I’ve known who have said that the only reason they’re working is to earn their health insurance.  Of course that’s the way it should be.

1% of Americans pay 40% of the income tax.
5% of Americans pay 60% of the income tax.
10% of Americans pay 70% of the income tax.

I’ve said this several times lately here on SA, and I’ve decided to make it my official Election ‘08 slogan:

We Are So Screwed

The future ain’t what it used to be…..

(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Ed Morrissey notes that a similar analysis done by the National Taxpayers Union shows that Obama’s promises amount to even more on a year-by-year basis: $287 billion, or nearly 10% more than the current federal budget.

By comparison, Hillary’s acknowledged spending plans amount to some $218 billion more per year, while the proposals of John McCain add up to a mere $7 billion more per year.

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

I think we can all agree that the GOP isn’t an unbiased source of information regarding Sen. Obama’s economic plans.

For example, they probably used the highest figures possible, even when they could easily been trimmed back. They also probably don’t include any of Sen. Obama’s spending cuts.

On the other hand, the GOP might just be lying. They do that sometimes.

This is why, although it may pain you to do so, you ought to vote for McCain. He’s far less likely to run the ship of state into the spending iceberg in quite the way either Clinton or Obama will.

Staying home on election day isn’t principled. It’s social and financial suicide.

And to think I heard Rush Limbaugh claim that elections can’t be bought.

We Are So Screwed

Pilgrim on February 13, 2008 at 11:17 am

Times 2050…..!

Jack:

I think we can all agree that the GOP isn’t an unbiased source of information regarding Sen. Obama’s economic plans.

Definitely.  I’d like to see something a bit more authoritative than the opposition party’s claims…

Tax and spend…

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

And all this from who? The GOP you say? they found their voice during election time? Wow!!!
This from the party of borrow an spend. Amazing.

Fear mongering from the GOP. And the most amazing thing is their scare tactic is working. Some of you that did not support McCain are now falling in line.

The GOP found its voice at election time? Who said that?

The GOP can’t find it’s own behind in its own underwear right now. With both hands. That’s why we’re being left to opportunistic bottom feeders like Obama and Hillary.

GOP. Gutless Old Pinheads.

We Are So screwed.

The future ain’t what it used to be…..

(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

On the other hand, the GOP might just be lying. They do that sometimes.

Jack,

So… got anything to back up your accusation?  Are the RNC and the NTU “lying” about the cost of Obma’s spending proposals and do you have anything to show that they are?

Or are you merely throwing mindless accusations around to distract us from the fact that your boy Obama is just another free-spending liberal with a pretty face and no resume?

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

ellinas,

“Fear mongering”?  “Scare tactics”?

Why don’t you simply put down the rhetoric for a moment and focus on the numbers instead.  If you’ve got some authoritative citations that show that both the RNC numbers and those of the NTU are inaccurate, why not simply share them in rebuttal and dispense with all the hyperbole?

Got anything to offer us?

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Yes Bat One. Fear mongering and scare tactics. What a presidential candidate promises and proposes during election time does not materialize during their term as president. Their rhetoric is almost allways tempered by either reality or congress.

What a presidential candidate promises and proposes during election time does not materialize
during their term as president.

Especially with Clinton.  We’re still waiting for that “middle class tax cut”.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Ronald Reagan made three promises, all of which he kept.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Yes Bat One. Fear mongering and scare tactics. What a presidential candidate promises and proposes during election time does not materialize during their term as president

ellinas,

First of all, please explain how taking a person at his word, expecting an individual, particularly a candidate for the highest office in the land, to actually mean what he says and live up to the promises he made, how that constitutes “fear mongering and scare tactics”?

If you, and the rest of those on the liberal Left, are so jaded by your partisanship and so jaundiced in your outlook that you care not one wit about such common human conventions as integrity and honesty, then you have my undying pity… and my undying contempt.  I’m certainly glad that I don’t have to do business with any of you.

I wouldn’t presume to speak for anyone else here at SAB, but I imagine that an awful lot of Rob’s readers do value integrity, in themselves and in others they deal with, particularly our political leaders and those that wish to be.  It speaks volumes that you and those like you have so little regard for integrity.

That said, perhaps as a footnote, please confirm that you actually have nothing to support the notion that the figures cited by either RNC or NTU regarding Mr. Obama’s intended spending are bogus, or as Jack idiotically put it, lies.

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Ellinas, you are absolutely correct that we all ought to fear an Obama presidency because of the horrendous impact it could have on our bank accounts.  However, that does NOT mean to discuss this fact is fear-mongering. 

It’s called “thinking through the consequences,” an idea that we all might do better to consider doing more often.

We can easily raise $850 Billion through the magic of tax cuts.

We probably could, if he’d try it.  The problem is that his war on the American Consumer will likely cost a lot more than nine hundred billion.

1% of Americans pay 40% of the income tax.
5% of Americans pay 60% of the income tax.
10% of Americans pay 70% of the income tax.

Woof,

Give in line.  By the supporting the stimulus bill democrats admit that more money in taxpayers pockets is good for economic growth.  So there you have it.  Tax cuts put more money in taxpayers pockets.  More money means more investment and spending.  More investment and spending means more econmic activity.  More econmic activity means higher tax receipts.  You’re out of step.

Give = Get.  Got to proofread.

We can easily raise $850 Billion through the magic of tax cuts.

I understand that free enterprise economics seems like magic to a Marxist, but that’s only due to your ignorance of how things work.  The idea of reducing marginal tax rates is to make more money available to the ones who earned it; social justice, if you will.  It doesn’t excuse Obama’s profligate wasteful spending.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Regarding Jack’s point that we might not best trust the GOP website as a resource on Obama’s spending; true, but the GOP does link to the website of one “Barack Hussein Obama,” who might be a good judge of what “Barack Hussein Obama” might be up to.

Regarding Jack’s point that we might not best trust the GOP website as a resource on Obama’s spending; true, but the GOP does link to the website of one “Barack Hussein Obama,” who might be a good judge of what “Barack Hussein Obama” might be up to.

You can say that again.

1% of Americans pay 40% of the income tax.
5% of Americans pay 60% of the income tax.
10% of Americans pay 70% of the income tax.

We can easily raise $850 Billion through the magic of tax cuts.

WOOF,

Of course its a given that you intended this as a snide slap at Supply Side conservatives, but as it happens, as part of a larger package of spending AND tax cuts, you just might have stumbled onto something here.  Blind squirrels and all that.

From economist Daniel Clifton, then of the American Shareholders Association commenting on last year’s CBO report:

When Congress passed the 15 percent reduction on capital gains all we heard from the naysayers is this will produce massive deficits. When Congress extended the 15 percent rate in 2006 we heard the same tired rhetoric - only louder. Now the new leadership want to repeal this tax cut to generate revenue to the federal government. Based on the new data they may want to reconsider whether repealing this tax cut will generate any revenue to the federal government.

Today’s CBO report puts the debate to bed. We were told by the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) the capital gains tax cut would “cost” the Federal Treasury $5.4 billion in fiscal years 2003-2006.

Thus, the initial CBO forecast (January 2004) forecasted capital gains revenue to be $42 billion in 2003, $46 billion in 2004, $52 billion in 2005, and $57 billion in 2006.

Well in what could now be considered the worst forecast in modern times we find out today capital gains tax collections were actually $51 billion in 2003, $72 billion in 2004, $97 billion in 2005, and $110 billion in 2006. For 2005 and 2006 collections nearly doubled the initial forecast.
Translation = total capital gains tax collections over this period were 68 percent higher than forecasted. But even more important, a loss of $5.4 billion is actually a gain of $133 billion. That is a swing of $138 billion in in just short years since the January 2004 forecast. Oops!
The surge of capital gains tax collections following the 2003 tax cut is just absolutely striking although all the indicators such as non-wage income tax collections and IRS data on capital gains income all pointed to this happening. And of course other capital gains tax changes, such as the 1997 capital gains tax cut, produced the same effect.

As economist Don Luskin points out here, there is a marked difference between the static analysis used by those on the Left to justify their policy choices of higher and higher tax rates and spending, and the dynamic analysis used by those in the real world to do honest economic evaluation and forecasting.

Tax cuts, particularly cuts on the taxes imposed on capital, can more than “pay for themselves.”  Way, way more!

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

The keel of your sailboat snagged on the bottom, you would have fallen off the edge of the earth.

BB,

The National Taxpayers Union website referenced above, also links to Obama’s site.  The accuracy of the numbers is easily checked by anyone who is sufficiently distrustful and has sufficient time on their hands.

So far none of the libs here have offered any sort of proof that Obama’s spending proposals have been overstated.  He’s a very liberal Democrat.  If anything, the numbers given are probably low.  Besides, its still early.

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Thanks, BatOne, but I liked Whistlers comment on my (inadvertent double) post better.  :^)

Seriously, well said.

Bat One he means what he says. but can he deliver?
Well lets see. Reagan a limited govt. prez left us massive deficits. So will Bush.

ellinas,

Part of the evaluation process for any such candidate’s proposals should surely be the honest cost of what is proposed, don’t you agree?

Whether a candidate can deliver or not ultimately depends on the number of people who believe those costs are justified under the circumstances.

The deficit, which has been declining far more rapidly than expected, will go back up again now that the so-called “stimulus package” has been enacted.  Yet knowing this, interest rates continue to edge downward, and in point of fact, we have been in an interest rate inversion for the better part of the past two years.  Odd that!

Similarly, when the Reagan tax cuts were passed the scream from the Left was “deficits as far as the eye could see.”  Yet if you track interest rates from the inception of those tax cuts forward, they track pretty steadily downward.  All of which suggests that a growing economy, as opposed to the static, and stagnant model offered up so tirelessly by the Left, can more than handle the deficits if they are a DE-creasing percentage of GDP.

Think of it as a family.  As the family income increases the additional monthly payments on a car for the kid, a cabin on some acreage in the mountains, a condo at the beach, or college tuition becomes more possible.  The additional debt becomes more affordable if properly managed.

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Besides, Reagan had to restore our military after Carter had gutted it, and finally dealt with the Soviets by outspending them militarily.  It worked, which is a very nice return on investment.
Likewise, the Bush deficit is at least partly due to having to rebuild our military after Clinton gutted it, and from responding to terrorism, which Clinton refused to do during his reign.  Bush also had to pay off the Clinton-enabled damage from 9/11.  Another good return on investment.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

“they probably used the highest figures possible, even when they could easily been trimmed back”

Seriously, are you that naive. When the hell was the last time a politician put a dollar figure on a program(s) that was even remotely close. I figured it would be conservative to triple the costs of BO’s programs

I’m waiting for all the usual suspects to come in and bitch and moan about what Hill or Barry’s new spending would do to the deficit. Oh that’s right, there are no limits to spending as long as we have a number of citizens to confiscate from, spend and tax is all good, can’t have any cuts you know.

“Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states? I think one left to go.”

The deficit, which has been declining far more rapidly than expected, will go back up again now that the so-called “stimulus package” has been enacted.  Yet knowing this, interest rates continue to edge downward, and in point of fact, we have been in an interest rate inversion for the better part of the past two years.  Odd that!
Bat One on February 13, 2008

Very odd indeed. You must be looking at our national deficit through some very foggy rosy glasses.
And the interest rates? You talked about integrity earlier. Show some and tell the truth as to why the interest rates went down.
As far as Robert108s assertions I have one word: Excuses.

e,

If you are going to challenge my facts, specifically that the deficit will go up again as a result of the silly so-called “stimulus package”, or that interest rates have been declining, or that we have spent the better part of the past two years in an interest rate inversion, than by all means do so.  That is if you’ve got something to back up your implied disagreement.  Certainly I’ll be willing to discuss it with you, if only to show that I am correct in what I’ve stated.

But if you are going to impugn my integrity over any of this you had goddamn well better have something more substantive to offer than the fact that you don’t know what you’re talking about and your fucking hormones are out of whack at the moment!

If you had it in mind to suggest that interest rates are declining because of recent action by the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee, then you had better be able to explain the what, why, and how of that interest rate inversion I mentioned, which has long preceded action by Bernanke and company.

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

The Fed controls the short term interest rates, the market the long term.  Looking at the yield chart on this page makes you pretty sure the Fed was far too aggressive raising interest rates.

1% of Americans pay 40% of the income tax.
5% of Americans pay 60% of the income tax.
10% of Americans pay 70% of the income tax.

Bat One. Your feathers have been ruffled. It shows. You also lost control.
Please get a hold of yourself.
No explanation needed. Just compare our national deficitas it stands today to any date since Bush took office.
Now head over to China and borrow a few billion $$$$.

Whistler,

I know that… and you know that.  But does ellinas know that?

Actually, FOMC only “controls” the overnight Fed Funds Rate.  The Discount Rate is actually a so-called “target” rate.  All other rates are “set” by the market.

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

That’s true, but they do in effect control the short term rates.

1% of Americans pay 40% of the income tax.
5% of Americans pay 60% of the income tax.
10% of Americans pay 70% of the income tax.

ellinas,

I intended that it show.  I don’t like having my integrity questioned… particularly by someone who obviously doesn’t have a clue what they’re talking about.

Besides, unlike the leftwing trolls who throw foul adjectives about like so many feces flinging monkeys, I find that limiting that sort of invective makes it much more effective when it is used.

Now, then, tell me what you know about interest rate inversions, and what it is that you think you kow that contradicts anything I’ve stated here.

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

I have one word: Excuses.

Wrong again, troll; the correct word is: Facts.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Avoiding the national debt question Bat One?
As far as your outrage goes it made me laugh.
And if you think that only you and a select few here On SA blog now what the federal open market Committee, or the Fed does think again.

Avoiding the national debt question Bat One?

E,

Excuse me, but what “national debt question” was that?  You brought up the defict in an earlier comment but as many of us among the “select few here on SA blog know” (note the correct spelling, please!) the deficit and the national debt are NOT the same thing.

All of which kinda reinforces the notion that you really don’t know what you’re talking about.

Incidentally, I’ve asked you about interest rate inversions and specifically what I stated above that you THINK was erroneous.  Gonna give that a shot, or have you just thought better of it, and decided to walk away?

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Budget deficit and national debt.
Good night. We will continue tomorrow.

I noted the correct spelling. A typo realy.

Really?

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Bat: As most people know that know anything about econ, the only honest assessment of our national debt is to express it as a percentage of our net worth.  Otherwise, it’s just more troll BS.
Besides, the majority of the national debt is money the politicians owe us.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Ellinas, it is true that the national debt increased as Reagan and later Bush 2 worked to remedy the national security lapses of Carter and Clinton.  However, I do not think that this an endorsement of Carter & Clinton’s policies, but rather the opposite.

And Obama wants a return to those policies that led to Al Qaida’s ability to get 19 people on airliners, AND a huge increase in social spending that would CREATE a new dependent class.

Sorry, but I ain’t buying.

R108,

Ellinas knows full well the difference between the budget deficit and the national debt.  The fact of the matter is that the national debt has never been a part of this conversation, and the deficit was brought up by ellinas merely as a ruse to avoid discussing the enormity of Obama’s spending proposals as detailed by two separate sources, and the acknowledged lack of integrity on the part of Mr. Obama and other Democrat candidates as pointed out by ellinas.

It’s a form of rhetorical terrorism… to try and hit and run before getting caught and being forced to defend one’s self, one’s thoughts and one’s actions.  Liberals are adept at this (though not as much so as they’d like to think) because so much of what they say is irrational, disingenuous, and ultimately indefensible.  The above “discussion” by ellinas is a perfect example.

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

The national debt plays an enormous role in our economy. It has to be repaid. The larger the debt the bigger the slice it takes from the annual budget neccesitating in more borrowing, or raising taxes since our government is unable to live within it’s means. I would rather pay now, then saddle future generations. Thus I detest borrow and spend policies of the GOP.

I would rather pay now…

Then do it.  The Dems “War on Poverty”: 6 trillion and counting; start there.  When can we expect your first payment?

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

e,

Your feelings about debt in general and the national debt in particular are duly noted, and I can’t begin to tell you how enormously relieved I am to know all this.

That said, shall we get back to the questions at hand… questions YOU raised regarding the accuracy of Mr. Obama’s proposed spending totals and the question of whether Democrat candidates are possessed of sufficient integrity to be taken seriously when they open their mouths, and lastly which of us, you or I knows what he is talking about with regard to
fiscal and monetary policy.

Or are you going to try to change the subject yet again to avoid answering questions which you raised yourself?

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Then do it.  The Dems “War on Poverty”: 6 trillion and counting; start there.  When can we expect your first payment?
robert108 on February 14, 2008 at 10:29 am

April 1st.

Probably even more important than the raw numbers Osama (oops, Obama) proposes are the results.  Obama is more or less regurgitating the War on the Poor—oops, the War on Poverty.  The six trillion or so (probably 7-8 trillion now) spent on this have succeeded in little more than the creation of our nation’s first permanent underclass.  What Jim Crow could not “achieve,” the War on the Poor did.

In contrast, defense spending such as that of Reagan also cost about six trillion dollars over the years, and allowed the free world to have a GDP that exceeds that of Communist nations by orders of magnitude.

I dare suggest that Reagan’s spending had a far better ROI than Carter’s, Johnson’s, or Clinton’s.

Bat One I have said on numerous occasions that politicians (no matter which party) lie the minute they open their mouths. And I stand by my statement.
You may disagree with me on the significance of the national debt and that is ok! I believe that being a debtor is not a good thing. I also believe that shifting the debt to our children is worse. I don’t expect to change your oppinion. I will not engage in your childish game called “mine is bigger than yours”

The six trillion or so (probably 7-8 trillion now) spent on this have succeeded in little more than the creation of our nation’s first permanent underclass.  What Jim Crow could not “achieve,” the War on the Poor did.
Bike Bubba on February 14, 2008 at 11:08 am

America had, and will allways have an underclass your less than truthfull rhetoric notwithstanding.

April 1st.

Your own words convict you, troll.

You may disagree with me on the significance of the national debt…

In order to assess its significance, as I said before, you have to express it as a percentage of our national net worth.  Until you do that, you are just flapping your gums.  Put up or shut up.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

e,

The fact that mine IS bigger than yours, is no excuse for you to try and change the subject when it has become apparent that you have no idea what you’re talking about.

The subject was as I’ve described… as anyone can read for themselves.  You jumped in to make your unsubstantiated accusations, and then hightail it for the nearest exit when it became obvious that you were in way over your head and couldn’t back up any of the accusations you’d made.

As I noted above, its a typical lefty tactic, and to be honest, one that I would have thought was unworthy of you.  My Bad!

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

America had, and will allways have an underclass your less than truthfull rhetoric notwithstanding.

He said “permanent” underclass, troll.  You lie again.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

...one that I would have thought was unworthy of you.

Actually, it has always been his modus operandi.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

America had, and will allways have a permanent underclass your less than truthfull rhetoric notwithstanding.

robert108 I have proved you alier on numerous occasions. Don’t get me started again.

Ellinas, there is a difference between an underclass and a permanent one.  Prior to the Great Society, we had poor people, of course, and many of them were in poverty that would astound us today.  One person in ten will always have lower income than the other nine.

A permanent underclass, however, implies that it would always be the same guy.  Prior to the Great Society, this wasn’t the case.  When we started paying people to have babies if only they’d refrain from getting a job or getting married, we started seeing whole generations of people languishing in the same squalor their grandparents suffered.

Now if you cannot process an adjective in a meaningful way, as your false accusation indicates, I’ll thank you very much to go back to grammar school and stop accusing me of lying.

Ellinas, I’ve never seen you prove anyone to be a liar.  Again, grammar school for you, not rhetoric and argument.

robert108 I have proved you alier on numerous occasions. Don’t get me started again.

Another lie from you, troll.  You never prove anything; you just spew lies and nonsense.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

America had, and will allways have a permanent underclass…

Name it, and the reasons for its permanence, troll.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

r-gumby: “Ronald Reagan made three promises, all of which he kept.”

Some of the promises he didn’t make include: not to raise taxes, to protect the border, to obey our laws, never to cut and run, not to negotiate with terrorists, to reduce the size of government…

Telling one lie or even consistently lying about one subject…doesn’t make you a liar…

robert108 on May 18, 2009 at 03:23 pm

“You have absolutely no reason, none, to trust our word or our actions at this point.”

Titular gop Head Mr. Steele

America had, and will allways have a permanent underclass…
Name it, and the reasons for its permanence, troll.
robert108 on February 14, 2008 at 11:45 am

For starters the slaves were an underclass.
Nowadays the illegals and the permanent welfare recipients are the underclass you idiot.

For starters the slaves were an underclass.
Nowadays the illegals and the permanent welfare recipients are the underclass you idiot.

Well said, Ellinas.  The War on the Poor, which created those welfare programs, created the nation’s first real underclass since that established by the government in slavery.

Many thanks for making my point.  It takes a GOVERNMENT to create an underclass, and the most powerful way to do so is by misguided charity.

For starters the slaves were an underclass. A lie; slavery was outlawed 140 years ago, so not permanent.
Nowadays the illegals and the permanent welfare recipients are the underclass you idiot.  We have4 already told you this, and you tried to deny it.  Who’s the idiot?

Another lie from you:

The six trillion or so (probably 7-8 trillion now) spent on this have succeeded in little more than the creation of our nation’s first permanent underclass. What Jim Crow could not “achieve,” the War on the Poor did.
Bike Bubba on February 14, 2008 at 11:08 am

America had, and will allways have an underclass your less than truthfull rhetoric notwithstanding.

It is you who were “less than truthful”, troll.
ellinas on February 14, 2008 at 12:18 pm

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

For starters the slaves were an underclass.

A lie; slavery was outlawed 140 years ago, so not permanent.
Nowadays the illegals and the permanent welfare recipients are the underclass you idiot.  We have4 already told you this, and you tried to deny it.  Who’s the idiot?

You are the idiot r108. I said were an underclass. As in past tense you idiot.
Furthermore war on poverty or not you would still have a permanent underclass. Like the Wall-Mart employees.

Actually, false, ellinas.  The trick is that two minimum wage incomes raise a couple above the poverty threshold for a family of four, and people who actually learn to work rarely stay at minimum wage for very long.  There is a remarkable amount of mobility in social class for those who work, marry, and don’t become addicted to drugs and alcohol.

And for that matter, even slavery wasn’t completely rigid.  Many owners realized that involuntary labor was completely unmotivated, and thus started to pay their “servants” and give them the opportunity to buy their freedom. 

Again, Obama is proposing an extension of a system that has been more effective at creating underclasses than anything since Appomattox, and arguably was similar in effectiveness to that which prevailed before.  That should sober us.

Furthermore war on poverty or not you would still have a permanent underclass. Like the Wall-Mart employees.

First, BB said “permanent” underclass, and you changed it to “underclass”, and called what he said “untruthful rhetoric”.  Now that you have been throughly refuted, you affirm what he originally said as true, and try to play some silly word game about slavery, and try to go back to your original misquote.  Pathetic, troll.
WalMart employees are not an underclass at all, and they aren’t “permanent” either; they can come and go as they like.  As usual, you are wrong about everything.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

I every society there exists a permanent underclass whether you like it or not. In our society we feed and house them so they don’t have to beg and live on the streets. Even this system does not guarantee that there would be no beggars or people slleping in the streets.

Ellinas, I’ve never seen you prove anyone to be a liar.  Again, grammar school for you, not rhetoric and argument.
Bike Bubba on February 14, 2008 at 11:40 am

B.B. Everybody has eyes, but not everybody can see.
Of those that are able to see there is a large percentage that do not and can not notice.
Which one are you?

Ellinas, again, if you believe that there is an underclass existing apart from those related to government intervention, then you ought to come up with an example.  Sorry, but given that a married couple at minimum wage isn’t below the poverty line, those working at Wal-mart don’t qualify as underclass, let alone permanently so.

Perhaps it’s not my eyes that need to be checked here.  For other reference, see the work of Dr. Walter Williams (on http://www.jewishworldreview.com) and Dr. Marvin Olasky (“The Tragedy of American Compassion.”)  The ugly reality is that long term squalor is the child of not capitalistic cruelty, but rather misguided socialistic compassion.

B.B. That is your oppinion. Mine is different.I will respect your oppinion and leave it at that. We will never agree, for we are entrenched in our point of view.

We will never agree, for we are entrenched in our point of view.

No; BB is stating facts, you are simply stating opinion based on nonsense.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

I every (socialist) society there exists a permanent underclass whether you like it or
not.

In our free enterprise society, people are free to make choices; if they make the ones that bring them into poverty, they are responsible for that; it’s not the doing of society, but of the individual.  That even applies to those who choose to depend on taxpayer charity, as well as those who choose to illegally invade this country.  We just don’t shoot them, as a totalitarian society would.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Well that is your oppinion. And you are entitled to it.

It’s not an opinion; it’s called “the proletariat”.  Reread your Marx.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

This individualistic utopia you describe exists only in theory. No matter how you cut it, what one does affects us all. If in a retaurant, I was siting to a table close to you and chose to fart it would ruin your meal.

“Individualistic utopia” is an oxymoron, troll.  As usual, you are farting through your oral cavity.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Individualistic utopia” is an oxymoron.
robert108

So you say. But you have also lied a lot.

Actually, troll, it is you who lies constantly. Here’s the refutation of your lie about a “permanent” underclass in the US:

http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/why_a_free_society_doesnt_produce_a_permanent_underclass_upward_mobility

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

From Merriam-Webster:

  uto·pia Listen to the pronunciation of utopia
Pronunciation:
  \yu̇-ˈtō-pē-ə\
Function:
  noun
Etymology:
  Utopia, imaginary and ideal country in Utopia (1516) by Sir Thomas More, from Greek ou not, no + topos place
Date:
  1597

1: an imaginary and indefinitely remote place2often capitalized : a place of ideal perfection especially in laws, government, and social conditions3: an impractical scheme for social improvement

Individualism is anything but “ideal perfection”.

  ox·y·mo·ron Listen to the pronunciation of oxymoron
Pronunciation:
  \ˌäk-sē-ˈmȯr-ˌän\
Function:
  noun
Inflected Form(s):
  plural ox·y·mo·ra Listen to the pronunciation of oxymora \-ˈmȯr-ə\
Etymology:
  Late Greek oxymōron, from neuter of oxymōros pointedly foolish, from Greek oxys sharp, keen + mōros foolish
Date:
  1657

: a combination of contradictory or incongruous words (as cruel kindness); broadly : something (as a concept) that is made up of contradictory or incongruous elements

As usual, you don’t know what you are talking about.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Both words of the Greek language of which you know nothing.
Utopia, imaginary and ideal country. That is where you wish you could live. A country where your utopian individualistic ideals would be the law of the land. Like I said: Everything everybody does affects you. You cannot insulate yourself from society.

ellinas,
Part of the evaluation process for any such candidate’s proposals should surely be the honest cost of what is proposed, don’t you agree?
Bat One on February 13, 2008 at 07:00 pm

No Bat One I do not agree beause a smart voter would know this:What a presidential candidate promises and proposes during election time does not materialize during their term as president.

Their rhetoric is almost allways tempered by either reality or congress

.
ellinas on February 13, 2008 at 12:05 pm

Both words of the Greek language of which you know nothing. Another lie from you.
Utopia, imaginary and ideal country. That is where you wish you could live. A country where your utopian individualistic ideals would be the law of the
land. It’s called the United States, which is founded on individualism(which is not utopian in any way). Like I said: Everything everybody does affects you. You cannot insulate yourself from society.
Individuals certainly affect each other, and I never said they didn’t; that’s just an ignorant assumption on your part. Individualism is the opposite of collectivism, and has nothing to do with being affected by other individuals.  You are deeply ignorant, as usual.  The US has become the most successful country in the world by being based on individualism, which is proof that it is not utopian.  It is your Marxism which is utopian.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Bat: I don’t think the troll understands what “evaluation process” means.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Now you are going to claim that you speak Greek?

eisai atimos,vlakas kai ilitheos.

Then melas ellinika kai to xeris.

In our arguments, the collectivism you are talking about has never crossed my mind. You are stuck like a faulty record. You are falsely and repeatedly accuse me and others of something we don’t believe in. Your mind is convoluted and stuck.

More lying and trolling nonsense from you.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

  in·di·vid·u·al·ism Listen to the pronunciation of individualism
Pronunciation:
  \ˌin-də-ˈvij-wə-ˌli-zəm, -ˈvi-jə-wə-, -ˈvi-jə-ˌli-\
Function:
  noun
Date:
  1827

1 a (1): a doctrine that the interests of the individual are or ought to be ethically paramount; also : conduct guided by such a doctrine (2): the conception that all values, rights, and duties originate in individuals b: a theory maintaining the political and economic independence of the individual and stressing individual initiative, action, and interests; also : conduct or practice guided by such a theory

Nothing utopian about it.  Once again, troll, you demonstrate you don’t know what you are talking about.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Now you are going to claim that you speak Greek?

No.  Your statement that I know nothing about Greek is false.  You have no idea what I know about Greek, so you lied.  You made the claim that I know nothing about Greek, and you are unable to prove that.  The burden of proof is on the accuser.

If govt control of the economy were the way to go, the Soviet Union would be the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world.

Thanks to Obama, America remains the only country where it is illegal to drill our own oil!

Let’s just see here… I state that part of evaluating the proposals of a presidential candidate should include an accurate assessment of the costs of those proposals.  To which you disagree, offering some circular gibberish about voters already knowing those costs, and then blowing the whole subject off with this astounding bit of irrational fluff:

What a presidential candidate promises and proposes during election time does not materialize during their term as president.

In the first place, that sort of sordid cynicism may be how those of you on the Left conduct your political affairs, but any modestly sentient human being observing what has gone on among those of us on/in the Right lately would understand that our side of the aisle cares very deeply about the policies, the ideas and the philosophy and itegrity of our candidates.  We expect the people who represent us to be honest.

Just as importantly, of course, what you say is wrong.  At least on our side of the aisle it is.  Granted, as was pointed out earlier this week, some of us are still awaiting the middle class tax cut that Bill Clinton promised in 1992.  So perhaps, for those on the left, promises really don’t mean anything at all.  Honesty and integrity are just campaign slogans to Democrats… words without menaing or substance.

But on our side, people are expected to say what they mean, not just whatever is expedient, and we expect our candidates to live up to their promises.  Ronald Reagan, as was pointed out yesterday, made and kept his three campaign promises.  The current President Bush has been overtaken by the events of 9-11 and the War on Islamist terrorism, but the fact is, of the issues he campaigned on, he has only failed to deliver on unfunded entitlement liability reform… Social Security and Medicare.  And that only because congressional Democrats have refused to even sit down and discuss the issue.

My first inclination is to be angry at the sheer stupidity of your remarks here, E.  But the more I think about it, the more grateful I am that you’ve provided so stark a reminder of the very basic differences between those on the Left who, like you, care only for the expediency of getting liberals elected, no matter what needs to be said or done to accomplish that goal, and those of us on/in the Right for whom ideas, policy choices, and ultimately integrity matters.  I could spend all day describing the expediency and inherent dishonesty of those on the Left, without doing nearly so masterful a job as what your remarks here have demonstrated.  Thanks for the lesson.

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”

Bat One pay attention:

Their rhetoric is almost allways tempered by either reality or congress

Robert108. One more time: You do not speak Greek.
Utopia, and oxymoron are Greek words.

Individualism like marxism are utopian theories.

ellinas,

Pay attention:  You are intellectually constipated, and you have no business attempting rational discourse with those of us who are not.

“Capitalism is optimism monetized.”