By mainexile, unverified — Thu, 04/01/2010 - 08:41
For once, Mr. Pitts makes a clear, lucid argument with which I cannot find fault. And in response, I will change my account to list my real name (even though it is available by clicking on my nom del plume). I now challenge all contributors to this forum to do the same and show the audience that you are proud and accountable for the posts you create.
By mainexile, unverified — Thu, 04/01/2010 - 08:25
Tell me, Veritas, what is boorish about a group that seeks to limit government spending and, by extension, government taxation? Troglodyte, indeed? The only aspect of that word that applies is hole-dwelling...in that the fiscal hole in which I dwell was created by the uncontrolled and unnecessary spending practices of the federal and state governments since the beginning of the 20th century.
By mainexile, unverified — Wed, 03/31/2010 - 06:56
Mr. Sirotta's explanation of progressivism vs. liberalism is analogous to asking a condemned man whether he wants a firing squad or a slow-acting poison. One may be quicker and, ultimately, less painful than the other, but the end result is the same: death. Just as the "P" vs. "L" argument yields in the same results: higher taxes and lower quality of life.
How about this: For ten years, let's try reducing taxes on SMALL businesses to allow the true economic engine of America the opportunity to expand their enterprises, hire more employees (which in turn results in more income tax revenue), and stimulate the creative spirit for which this country is known. At the same time, let's limit current year spending to only what was generated in tax revenue for the prior fiscal year thereby essentially enacting a balanced budget. And if that means making across-the-board spending cuts, so be it - no sacred cows (defense, welfare, earmarks, etc.). And for god's sake, stop raiding Social Security and pay back the IOU's taken over the past decades.
By mainexile, unverified — Sun, 03/28/2010 - 09:51
There is a website, www.pollingreport.com/health.htm, that provides the latest data on the sentiments of americans about health care reform. Look for yourself and decide how the country feels about this issue.
By mainexile, unverified — Fri, 03/26/2010 - 06:41
deimos, while your post is a very well-written analogy of the current healthcare debacle (and one that will certainly draw the usual derogatory comments from the usual liberal/progressive/socialist denizens of this forum), you did not write it. It would be hypocritical of me to stand silent when you fail to give proper credit to the original author but excoriate the lefties when they do the same thing. Therefore, putting aside the excellent, thinly-veiled denouncement of the monstrous health care legislation, I must take issue with your illegitimate use of another's original work without giving proper acknowledgement to the creator. Please edit your post to cite the source.
By mainexile, unverified — Wed, 03/24/2010 - 19:46
It's apparent that you feel intellectually threatened by anyone who can form a cohesive sentence while exhibiting accurate spelling ("whinny" should be "whiney"), proper grammar and usage ("infer" should be "imply") while debating an issue without resorting to insults, slurs and sexual smears. It is truly sad that you must go through life with an overactive need to display your ineptitude and an underactive brain, as evidenced by the tone and content of your posts. Perhaps some day you will be able to attend night classes to improve your communication skills and (maybe, just maybe) receive that GED which has been so elusive for you. Best of luck with that.
By the way, the term "teabagger" is a coarse, crass and crude (like the alliteration? go ahead, look it up) comment that only demonstrates the mental incompetence of the user.
By mainexile, unverified — Wed, 03/24/2010 - 17:08
I'm happy to see that you are finally taking action by deleting comments of a slanderous nature. I have to ask, though, when will you begin to delete accounts of those who repetitively resort to insults over presentation of opinions or facts? Also, when will you censure comments of an overt or covert sexual nature such as those that refer to tea party attendees as teab@gger$. Please don't pretend to claim that this term isn't offensive - it's equally as offensive to people who are trying to reign in government spending as the "N" word is to African-American people or the "K" word to Jewish-Americans. Many of us who post here enjoy a good debate. But when that debate turns ugly, we frequently avoid this forum altogether in favor of other publications who demand a level of decorum that is, in many instances, missing here.
By mainexile, unverified — Wed, 03/24/2010 - 06:04
The Rumford Board of Selectmen is a classic example. They were an arrogant, pompous, power-hungry mob fifty years ago, and nothing has changed today. The cable franchise fees are paid only for the "privilege" of operating a cable television system in the town; the town has no financial exposure due to its operation and, therefore, should not use the fees as part of its operating budget or to pay for other bright ideas from this group of "town fathers"...such as that monstrous eyesore and waste of taxpayers' dollars sitting in front of the Rite Aid. What an unfortunate joke and complete waste of money that blue ox has turned out to be.
By mainexile, unverified — Tue, 03/23/2010 - 08:41
To all who inhabit this forum and are thrilled at the passage of this legislation, please answer one question: How will this mandated program be funded? Forget about the ridiculous proposal of taking money from Medicare - that amount won't even put a dent in the forecasted cost. So where does that leave us? It appears that in order to bring this program to fruition, the Congress will have to raise taxes to pay for it. And whom does that affect the most? You guessed it...the middle class, once again. How much more do you think this overburdened segment of the population is going to take? Hang onto your hats, folks. There's a major storm brewing, and the body count is going to be astronomical.
By mainexile, unverified — Thu, 03/18/2010 - 16:09
Veritas, aren't you fearful that in the process of cutting the defense budget, your military retirement and benefits might fall victim as well? Unless something (e.g. government pension) is clearly provided by the Constitution, it might be up for grabs.
Rather than a wholesale slashing of the Pentagon's budget, what if we were to insist upon ending "sweetheart" contracts to defense contractors who historically come in behind schedule and over budget like the current F-35 fiasco being perpetrated by Lockheed Martin, who gave (or rather, didn't give) us the VH-71 presidential helicopter and the A-12 strike aircraft...or Northrop Grumman, who built the shamefully faulty San Antonio-class Amphibious Transport Dock Ship and the Advanced SEAL Delivery System that went from an $80 million-per-hull program to almost $450 million per...or the blatant no-bid contracts awarded to FOD (Friends of Dick) during the Iraq conflict.
Why should the government (and by extension, we taxpayers) be responsible for PROVIDING health care to all legal U.S. residents? I'll admit that the system is broken, but I have little faith that the government is the solution. Let's try allowing interstate competition for health insurance as we do for Life, Auto and Home insurance. Remove the anti-trust protections and limit malpractice awards as well as the ponderous government regulations imposed on healthcare providers, and see if overall healthcare costs don't come down.
Lastly, while the Defense budget eats up the largest portion of the tax dollar, all of the entitlement programs are right behind. Cut defense spending? Fine. But cut some of the entitlements like Welfare (turn it into Workfare), Medicaid (base payments to all but those truly incapable of performing some functional task upon the work produced for the state of recipients' residence), Special Education (fully one-third of my town's school budget goes to Spec. Ed. to support 35 out of over 500 students). I agree with Mr. Thurston in that we have turned into a citizenry that looks with upraised palms to the various levels of government rather than doing for ourselves like our's and our parents' generations.
Valid Points
For once, Mr. Pitts makes a clear, lucid argument with which I cannot find fault. And in response, I will change my account to list my real name (even though it is available by clicking on my nom del plume). I now challenge all contributors to this forum to do the same and show the audience that you are proud and accountable for the posts you create.
Troglodyte?
Tell me, Veritas, what is boorish about a group that seeks to limit government spending and, by extension, government taxation? Troglodyte, indeed? The only aspect of that word that applies is hole-dwelling...in that the fiscal hole in which I dwell was created by the uncontrolled and unnecessary spending practices of the federal and state governments since the beginning of the 20th century.
Choose your poison?
Mr. Sirotta's explanation of progressivism vs. liberalism is analogous to asking a condemned man whether he wants a firing squad or a slow-acting poison. One may be quicker and, ultimately, less painful than the other, but the end result is the same: death. Just as the "P" vs. "L" argument yields in the same results: higher taxes and lower quality of life.
How about this: For ten years, let's try reducing taxes on SMALL businesses to allow the true economic engine of America the opportunity to expand their enterprises, hire more employees (which in turn results in more income tax revenue), and stimulate the creative spirit for which this country is known. At the same time, let's limit current year spending to only what was generated in tax revenue for the prior fiscal year thereby essentially enacting a balanced budget. And if that means making across-the-board spending cuts, so be it - no sacred cows (defense, welfare, earmarks, etc.). And for god's sake, stop raiding Social Security and pay back the IOU's taken over the past decades.
Take a look
There is a website, www.pollingreport.com/health.htm, that provides the latest data on the sentiments of americans about health care reform. Look for yourself and decide how the country feels about this issue.
Give credit to the author
deimos, while your post is a very well-written analogy of the current healthcare debacle (and one that will certainly draw the usual derogatory comments from the usual liberal/progressive/socialist denizens of this forum), you did not write it. It would be hypocritical of me to stand silent when you fail to give proper credit to the original author but excoriate the lefties when they do the same thing. Therefore, putting aside the excellent, thinly-veiled denouncement of the monstrous health care legislation, I must take issue with your illegitimate use of another's original work without giving proper acknowledgement to the creator. Please edit your post to cite the source.
Feeling inadequate?
It's apparent that you feel intellectually threatened by anyone who can form a cohesive sentence while exhibiting accurate spelling ("whinny" should be "whiney"), proper grammar and usage ("infer" should be "imply") while debating an issue without resorting to insults, slurs and sexual smears. It is truly sad that you must go through life with an overactive need to display your ineptitude and an underactive brain, as evidenced by the tone and content of your posts. Perhaps some day you will be able to attend night classes to improve your communication skills and (maybe, just maybe) receive that GED which has been so elusive for you. Best of luck with that.
By the way, the term "teabagger" is a coarse, crass and crude (like the alliteration? go ahead, look it up) comment that only demonstrates the mental incompetence of the user.
It's about time!
I'm happy to see that you are finally taking action by deleting comments of a slanderous nature. I have to ask, though, when will you begin to delete accounts of those who repetitively resort to insults over presentation of opinions or facts? Also, when will you censure comments of an overt or covert sexual nature such as those that refer to tea party attendees as teab@gger$. Please don't pretend to claim that this term isn't offensive - it's equally as offensive to people who are trying to reign in government spending as the "N" word is to African-American people or the "K" word to Jewish-Americans. Many of us who post here enjoy a good debate. But when that debate turns ugly, we frequently avoid this forum altogether in favor of other publications who demand a level of decorum that is, in many instances, missing here.
Some things never change
The Rumford Board of Selectmen is a classic example. They were an arrogant, pompous, power-hungry mob fifty years ago, and nothing has changed today. The cable franchise fees are paid only for the "privilege" of operating a cable television system in the town; the town has no financial exposure due to its operation and, therefore, should not use the fees as part of its operating budget or to pay for other bright ideas from this group of "town fathers"...such as that monstrous eyesore and waste of taxpayers' dollars sitting in front of the Rite Aid. What an unfortunate joke and complete waste of money that blue ox has turned out to be.
Another unfunded mandate?
To all who inhabit this forum and are thrilled at the passage of this legislation, please answer one question: How will this mandated program be funded? Forget about the ridiculous proposal of taking money from Medicare - that amount won't even put a dent in the forecasted cost. So where does that leave us? It appears that in order to bring this program to fruition, the Congress will have to raise taxes to pay for it. And whom does that affect the most? You guessed it...the middle class, once again. How much more do you think this overburdened segment of the population is going to take? Hang onto your hats, folks. There's a major storm brewing, and the body count is going to be astronomical.
Self-annihilation?
Veritas, aren't you fearful that in the process of cutting the defense budget, your military retirement and benefits might fall victim as well? Unless something (e.g. government pension) is clearly provided by the Constitution, it might be up for grabs.
Rather than a wholesale slashing of the Pentagon's budget, what if we were to insist upon ending "sweetheart" contracts to defense contractors who historically come in behind schedule and over budget like the current F-35 fiasco being perpetrated by Lockheed Martin, who gave (or rather, didn't give) us the VH-71 presidential helicopter and the A-12 strike aircraft...or Northrop Grumman, who built the shamefully faulty San Antonio-class Amphibious Transport Dock Ship and the Advanced SEAL Delivery System that went from an $80 million-per-hull program to almost $450 million per...or the blatant no-bid contracts awarded to FOD (Friends of Dick) during the Iraq conflict.
Why should the government (and by extension, we taxpayers) be responsible for PROVIDING health care to all legal U.S. residents? I'll admit that the system is broken, but I have little faith that the government is the solution. Let's try allowing interstate competition for health insurance as we do for Life, Auto and Home insurance. Remove the anti-trust protections and limit malpractice awards as well as the ponderous government regulations imposed on healthcare providers, and see if overall healthcare costs don't come down.
Lastly, while the Defense budget eats up the largest portion of the tax dollar, all of the entitlement programs are right behind. Cut defense spending? Fine. But cut some of the entitlements like Welfare (turn it into Workfare), Medicaid (base payments to all but those truly incapable of performing some functional task upon the work produced for the state of recipients' residence), Special Education (fully one-third of my town's school budget goes to Spec. Ed. to support 35 out of over 500 students). I agree with Mr. Thurston in that we have turned into a citizenry that looks with upraised palms to the various levels of government rather than doing for ourselves like our's and our parents' generations.
How about it?