Say Anything Blog

This is still a free country; once money is paid to someone, that person alone gets to decide how it’s spent, with no input from you or any other busybodies.
You may argue with the disbursement of the money(as do I), but once it is disbursed, it’s nobody’s business but that of the individual.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

r108
goddamn right i have a problem with the disbursment! i have no problems with how other people spend their own money… but not money that shouldn’t be theirs.

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

… but not money that shouldn’t be theirs.

You just don’t get it, Sparkie.  You don’t get to decide for others, no matter how much you want to.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

but not money that shouldn’t be theirs.

In the private part of our economy people voluntarily trade to get the best advantage for themselves. 

Therefore any money earned in commerce rightfully belongs to who earned it.

I really hope sparkless was referring to thieves, extortion and taxes as ways that people don’t have money that is rightfully theirs.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

TW: This is the primary way that leftieism destroys freedom.  I think the discretionary decision about who gets govt benefits is where we should exercise control, but not after the money is allocated.  Lefties think just the opposite; they will give our money to anyone over whom they wish to exercise power, regardless of need, and then feel entitled to control how that money is used.  Nothing could illustrate the difference between the conservative mind and the leftie mind any more clearly.  To lefties, once you take their(sic) money, they own you.  Thus the creeping cancer of leftie totalitarianism spreads through the claimed good intention of “helping people”.  The lefties claim superiority by virtue of their “compassion”, while they actually seek to control everyone.  It’s the devil’s bargain.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

toot/r108

the creeping cancer of leftie totalitarianism

nice sniping. let me resample the post so I can drive home a point. totalitarianism is a bit vitrolic, nice turn, but i think the main point here lies in this question:

What about the law?

and also this question

how many hours it will take congress to give the entire effing country… away after, say, a terrorist blows up a larger chunk of some city?

So, provide some answers. We often hear that the suspension of the rules is fine - it is not, clearly.

Also, this

In the private part of our economy people voluntarily trade to get the best advantage for themselves.

and this

feel entitled to control how that money is used

are so cute! go back to bitching about BreckGirl’s haircut chumps. $400. that was the issue right? also, you say you agree with me, r108, then rail on my leftie agenda!?! what?

I am not much of a leftist. or a rightist. or a centrist. we need an x axis and a z axis on this ‘spectrum’.

A random anecdote:
Alexander the Great went to see Diogenes because D rejected mores, railed on the fallibilism of everyone, and opposed the state. Alexander favored world gov’t. With him in charge. He went to see the guy who also saw himself as a citizen of the world, Diogenes. Unfortunately, Diogenes did not endorse world government, despite rejecting local gov’t (He lived in Galatia). Diogenes, when he met Alexander the Great, said, “Can you get out of my light?” Alexander the Great said, “If I wasn’t Alexander the Great, I would’ve like to be Diogenes.” Paul (yes, St. Paul) was from Galatia. It was to Diogenes’ home town crowd that Paul delivered the address about how, to Jesus, we are all equals (I don’t know the citation here, but its were he says ‘man or woman… we are all equal under the lord’ or something to that effect). Wow, interesting where the cynics influence Christianity, eh?

At any rate, 27billion. That’s a lot. “Get out of my light” indeed. Get out of my wallet.

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

You missed it yet again, Sparkie.  I often wonder about your reading comprehension, but no matter.  My point is that the discretionary decision is in how large and intrusive govt should be.  Trying to control people by giving them money with strings attached is the leftie way to totalitarianism, no matter how you want to deny it.  We need to stop the practice of “helping” people with tax money, unless they really need it, and furthermore, we need to stop thinking we are entitled to control how they spend the money we give them to “help” them.  Otherwise, it’s not “helping”, it’s power and control.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

r108
que? i am talking about your boy, Jr., lavishing praise on this errant, idiotic spending. Unlike cheese and gravy atop fries (poutine=good!), this sort of lavishing is bad (stupidity=bad!). am I to understand, from your comments that you believe Bush to be a totalitarian leftist [sic]? I am talking about bipartisan stupidity. You are trying to make it partisan… so I am wondering if you are placing Bush and the entire congress which partook in this 5 hour debate under the umbrella of ‘totalitarian leftist’? perhaps Bush can plead insanity, right? wrong. he just licked the ass of this debacle by praising it effusively. the insanity extends to everyone in your party who endorsed this, almost all of them. mass temporary insanity? if we accept any revisionist, bullshit rationalization of this or partisan spinning, we are missing the point. the point is fed=bad! poutine=good! alexander the great=bad! diogenes=good!
Compare these points to not what politicians say, but what their actions evidense. fed=good. poutine=bad. alexander the great=good. diogenes=bad.
If you are still holding out that Alexander the Great or the Fed can be ‘good’, you have not recognised the fallibility inherent when normative systems (morality et al) and causal systems (economy, environment) interact. We can never, in any way, recognise the factors nec. to make global predictions of these various causal systems (c.f. Hayek). When they present variety, as no event occurs twice, normative systems amount to coping mechanisms. Various sorts of normative coping mechanisms are suited to different causal environments. For us to hold that our normative system is THE system is to be totally ignorant of the big picture. The big picture is 1) most things are bullshit 2) use it if it works (c.f. Toot in comment above). Nonetheless, modeling one sort of system based only on self interested agents alone (c.f. Hayek, Toot, r108), is to fall severly short of anything actual or real, no matter how much you rail against ‘theory’. Tarts.

27 billion for ‘guilt’ and to settle what amount to private debts (airline companies, et al) by the fed is absurd.

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

Sparkie: This is reality, not your usual pseudointellectual poofery.  Money with strings attached has ruined the family structure of our inner cities.  That’s a reality, dude.
Your partisan rant notwithstanding, any time any govt says it’s “helping people”, but tries to control what they do with the “help” has the same results.
Get over yourself.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.