Spending cut proposals

NigelTufnel said:
Right. I'm a left-winger and you right smack dab in the center. I totally buy that shit man.

You are anti-abortion. You supported the War in Iraq. You voted for George W. Bush. Twice. You supported the Bush tax cuts. You are generally anti-taxes and anti-government spending. You support privatizing Social Security. You support less government regulation of health care and the health insurance industry. You support less government regulation generally. You support "tort reform."

Need I go on?
Click to expand...

are you actually claiming you're not a left winger?
 
Superfreak said:
So it is 'stealing and pilfering' to suggest that the federal government not pay for any and all entitlements the left can think up?
Click to expand...
No but as Oncie pointed out, a partisan list that doesn't include serious cuts in DoD spending is just a recipe for more partisan bickering.

First a lot of their cuts are based on smoke and mirrors. More then a third of it is based on projected costs of health care reform. The rest is nickel and dime. So this has not been a step in the right direction. It's just more DC partisan BS.

Second, DoD and related spending account for 55% of total spending if you include the cost of Afghanistan and Iraq. To not even put that up on the table is a slap in the face because since that is where the majority of Federal spending and wasted money is tied up that where the cuts need to begin.

Until Repelicans start any spending cuts program with "We will target these defense programs for cuts" and list real and meaningful reductions in defense spending then it's just simply impossible for me to take them the least bit seriously cause the biggest form of welfare there is in this nation is the corporate welfare given to the military-industrial and defense contracting establishment. Our government exist to represent the people and provide services which are not practicable to provide by the private sector and not to provide money and jobs to the good ole boy defense contractors.
 
Superfreak said:
I know you think calling me a right winger makes you feel all warm and special inside, but I am conservative on economic issues. Moderate on social.

But to you, anyone that doesn't think the government should run every aspect of our lives is a right winger. Which only further demonstrates what a total loon you are.
Click to expand...
That's not entirely fair. Their are certain things which government does provide better service for then the private sector. Because one recognizes this does not mean that one wants the Government to run everything. Defense is a perfect example. I'd hate like hell to see it ran completely by the private sector. Education is another example, though it's State and Local governments that do the heavy lifting in Education they do a far better job of educating large numbers of people then the private sector can. This is the nature of much of our debates. When it comes to trade and commerce I'm all for market capitalism but I see the need for government regulations to curb it's excesses and to protect employees and consumers from those excesses. The question is, were do you draw the line between to much and not enough? Again, that's a big part of the nature of our debates.
 
Bfgrn said:
Listen you little slime ball. ALL I care about and my only concern is for the human beings, the people that have a RIGHT to proper and competent representation in the justice system. A system that has a scurrilous history of justice for the privileged and injustice for the poor and black citizens in our country. THIS cut will only add to not remove my concerns.

But justice is not a tenet of conservatism, because your slime balls ALWAYS side with the big guy over the little guy, the wealthy over the poor. It's because even though most of you will never be rich, you have a Monica Lewinsky worship for them. You equate wealth with virtue.

The history of conservatism throughout the history of mankind is to build and support some form of an aristocracy.
Click to expand...
I don't know about the rest of your post but the last sentence is certainly true. That is indeed the nature of conservatism, historically speaking.
 
Bfgrn said:
Listen you little slime ball. ALL I care about and my only concern is for the human beings, the people that have a RIGHT to proper and competent representation in the justice system. A system that has a scurrilous history of justice for the privileged and injustice for the poor and black citizens in our country. THIS cut will only add to not remove my concerns.

But justice is not a tenet of conservatism, because your slime balls ALWAYS side with the big guy over the little guy, the wealthy over the poor. It's because even though most of you will never be rich, you have a Monica Lewinsky worship for them. You equate wealth with virtue.

The history of conservatism throughout the history of mankind is to build and support some form of an aristocracy.
Click to expand...

More moronic claptrap from you. Once again you demonstrate the idiotic mindset that 'if the government doesn't do it, no one will'. You rely upon tired democratic chants of 'u only care about the big guy not the little guy'. All the while you support a system that keeps those you claim to want to protect at the the government tit. Reliant upon government support. Dependent rather than independent. You don't help them break the cycle, you keep the government boot right on their necks and you continue to apply pressure. You make them so dependent on Uncle Sam that they will never break free.

You do far more harm to those in need than anyone else could. your behavior is synonymous with giving free drugs to a drug addict while claiming you are helping the addict.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
That's not entirely fair. Their are certain things which government does provide better service for then the private sector.
Click to expand...

Yes, and that was my point earlier to him. There are things the government does that it SHOULD do. This is not one of those things.


Because one recognizes this does not mean that one wants the Government to run everything.
Click to expand...

Either pay attention to the entire thread or you will continue to post meaningless crap like that. It is not even close to what he was stating. He wasn't saying 'the government can do some things better'. That was my position. He is saying that THIS particular item would not be done by the private sector if the government didn't do it.

THAT is what we are discussing.


Education is another example, though it's State and Local governments that do the heavy lifting in Education they do a far better job of educating large numbers of people then the private sector can.
Click to expand...

Which is why the elite in this country send their kids to private schools. The above is nonsense. You give the private sector the same funds that are given to the public school system and you see exactly the choice the populace makes.... they fight to send their kids to the private and charter schools vs. being stuck in the pathetic public school system.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
No but as Oncie pointed out, a partisan list that doesn't include serious cuts in DoD spending is just a recipe for more partisan bickering.

First a lot of their cuts are based on smoke and mirrors. More then a third of it is based on projected costs of health care reform. The rest is nickel and dime. So this has not been a step in the right direction. It's just more DC partisan BS.

Second, DoD and related spending account for 55% of total spending if you include the cost of Afghanistan and Iraq. To not even put that up on the table is a slap in the face because since that is where the majority of Federal spending and wasted money is tied up that where the cuts need to begin.

Until Repelicans start any spending cuts program with "We will target these defense programs for cuts" and list real and meaningful reductions in defense spending then it's just simply impossible for me to take them the least bit seriously cause the biggest form of welfare there is in this nation is the corporate welfare given to the military-industrial and defense contracting establishment. Our government exist to represent the people and provide services which are not practicable to provide by the private sector and not to provide money and jobs to the good ole boy defense contractors.
Click to expand...

Thanks captain obvious... now go back and read the original post in this thread. Then actually follow up by reading the next several posts by myself and Oncelor.

You just restated our position.
 
Superfreak said:
More moronic claptrap from you. Once again you demonstrate the idiotic mindset that 'if the government doesn't do it, no one will'. You rely upon tired democratic chants of 'u only care about the big guy not the little guy'. All the while you support a system that keeps those you claim to want to protect at the the government tit. Reliant upon government support. Dependent rather than independent. You don't help them break the cycle, you keep the government boot right on their necks and you continue to apply pressure. You make them so dependent on Uncle Sam that they will never break free.

You do far more harm to those in need than anyone else could. your behavior is synonymous with giving free drugs to a drug addict while claiming you are helping the addict.
Click to expand...

HARM? Fuck you. The HARM is to some of these women that are victims of domestic abuse, custody issues, foreclosure or eviction disputes and filing for bankruptcy.

Typical right wing blather. Your standard right wing argument doesn't even fit the circumstances. These people, mostly women need competent legal representation to BREAK the cycle of abuse. In some cases their lives may be in danger asshole.

You scum bags believe that swimming lessons means throwing people in the river...the ones that make it to shore pass...the rest fail. You slime balls just can't contain your excitement at the chance to punish people...you SWEET comment proves it...FUCK YOU
 
Bfgrn said:
HARM? Fuck you. The HARM is to some of these women that are victims of domestic abuse, custody issues, foreclosure or eviction disputes and filing for bankruptcy.
Click to expand...

Yes and yet again you provide no valid reason that their legal representation has to be paid for by the federal government. Open your eyes and take a look around you. There are countless private programs that are run to help abused women. In the past these women received pro-bono work from attorneys when they could not afford the help.

But as usual, the Dems gave one of their primary special interest groups.... lawyers... a handout. To proclaim that the government should fund representation for things like foreclosure, eviction, bankruptcy etc... is again... bullshit.

Typical right wing blather. Your standard right wing argument doesn't even fit the circumstances. These people, mostly women need competent legal representation to BREAK the cycle of abuse. In some cases their lives may be in danger asshole.
Click to expand...

As usual, you resort to emotional outbursts in an attempt to sway opinion.

You scum bags believe that swimming lessons means throwing people in the river...the ones that make it to shore pass...the rest fail. You slime balls just can't contain your excitement at the chance to punish people...you SWEET comment proves it...FUCK YOU
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO.... such a typical emo response from the left. You pretend AGAIN that if the government doesn't fund it, no one will.

Again.... and do try to pay attention this time moron... I know YOU wouldn't help these women on your own. I know YOU wouldn't donate to private organizations to help them. But that doesn't mean others wouldn't. THAT is why YOU want the government to be in charge of this. Because it is the only way YOU are going to help.... if FORCED to.

The majority of people are capable and willing to help by donating time and money to charities and non-profits without the government there to force the issue.

So quit pretending the ONLY way they will get help is by government intervention. Because that is simply mindless drivel.
 
Superfreak said:
Yes and yet again you provide no valid reason that their legal representation has to be paid for by the federal government. Open your eyes and take a look around you. There are countless private programs that are run to help abused women. In the past these women received pro-bono work from attorneys when they could not afford the help.

But as usual, the Dems gave one of their primary special interest groups.... lawyers... a handout. To proclaim that the government should fund representation for things like foreclosure, eviction, bankruptcy etc... is again... bullshit.



As usual, you resort to emotional outbursts in an attempt to sway opinion.



ROFLMAO.... such a typical emo response from the left. You pretend AGAIN that if the government doesn't fund it, no one will.

Again.... and do try to pay attention this time moron... I know YOU wouldn't help these women on your own. I know YOU wouldn't donate to private organizations to help them. But that doesn't mean others wouldn't. THAT is why YOU want the government to be in charge of this. Because it is the only way YOU are going to help.... if FORCED to.

The majority of people are capable and willing to help by donating time and money to charities and non-profits without the government there to force the issue.

So quit pretending the ONLY way they will get help is by government intervention. Because that is simply mindless drivel.
Click to expand...

BULLSHIT...the reasons many government programs came into being is people weren't getting proper and/or consistent help from your magical charities and private donations.

Some may be helped by your magical charities and private donations...but you don't KNOW that they will, now do you? So ALL you are doing is making an excuse not to care and to not have to examine your conscience.

Your 'sweet' comment makes me sick. These cuts will have bad consequences for some people...that is never 'sweet'
 
Bfgrn said:
BULLSHIT...the reasons many government programs came into being is people weren't getting proper and/or consistent help from your magical charities and private donations.

Some may be helped by your magical charities and private donations...but you don't KNOW that they will, now do you? So ALL you are doing is making an excuse not to care and to not have to examine your conscience.

Your 'sweet' comment makes me sick. These cuts will have bad consequences for some people...that is never 'sweet'
Click to expand...

Bullshit. The reason government programs were put into place was because Dems want to keep certain groups of people under the boot of the government.

Again.... just because YOU wouldn't help them on your own, doesn't mean no one will.

My conscience is clear, because unlike YOU, I actually donate my time and money to help those less fortunate. I do so in ways that help them educate themselves so that they are not constantly dependent on others. whereas you just want them under your masters boot.
 
Superfreak said:
Bullshit. The reason government programs were put into place was because Dems want to keep certain groups of people under the boot of the government.

Again.... just because YOU wouldn't help them on your own, doesn't mean no one will.

My conscience is clear, because unlike YOU, I actually donate my time and money to help those less fortunate. I do so in ways that help them educate themselves so that they are not constantly dependent on others. whereas you just want them under your masters boot.
Click to expand...

MORE standard right wing bullshit. The reason Democrats support programs like Legal Services Corporation is because they HELP people. Your solution is mere speculation. It is not concrete, reliable or consistent. All you can claim is it MAY work.

I suggest you educate yourself on liberal programs like the War on Poverty. It was not built on welfare or dependency...it was called the Office of Economic Opportunity for a REASON.

When JFK's brother-in law Sargent Shriver accepted LBJ's challenge and took on the 'War on Poverty' the first thing he discovered was rather startling and disturbing. Half of the Americans living in poverty were children. Another large segment were elderly and another segment were mentally and/or physically disabled. So a HUGE segment of the poor fit the TRUE definition of a dependent. So there is an obligation as a civil society to make sure those real dependents are not trampled on or extinguished.

To address some of the players in your fairy tale, voila! We have an unabashed flaming liberal...Sargent Shriver. But I hate to disappoint you. Sargent Shriver hated welfare and had no intention of creating a handout program. He didn't believe in handouts, he believed in community action. The 'War on Poverty' was called the Office of Economic Opportunity. The core principles were opportunity, responsibility, community and empowerment. The program strove for maximum feasible participation. One of the concepts of empowerment was poor people had a right to one-third of the seats on every local poverty program board. It was a community based program that focused on education as the keys to the city. Programs such as VISTA, Job Corps, Community Action Program, and Head Start were created to increase opportunity for the poor so they could pull themselves out of poverty with a hand UP, not a hand out. Even when Johnson effectively pulled the plug on the War on Poverty to fund the war in Vietnam, Shriver fought on and won. During the Shriver years more Americans got out of poverty than during any similar time in our history. (The Clinton years - employing the same philosophy - were the second best.)

Ref
 
Superfreak said:
Yes, I support tort reform.... a government REGULATION on the idiocy that goes on within the Democrats trial lawyer base that hurts this country. You cry about health care reform and then pretend defensive medicine and litigation aren't big components. All because your masters pumped the CBO with bad info which in turn created bad results. Garbage in... garbage out. Do tell us what the big drivers of costs are in health care if not litigation, medical malpractice premiums (you know, those things that are charged due to litigation), defensive medicine practices etc. Show us for once a study of the BILLS people receive. Break it down. Where are the charges coming from? But I know... you think it is just coincidence that the most litigious society on earth also has the highest per capita health care rates.

So yes... continue creating all the straw men you can. That is the only way you can label me a right winger in your crazy fantasy world.
Click to expand...

AGAIN...

Bfgrn said:
But justice is not a tenet of conservatism, because your slime balls ALWAYS side with the big guy over the little guy, the wealthy over the poor. It's because even though most of you will never be rich, you have a Monica Lewinsky worship for them. You equate wealth with virtue.

The history of conservatism throughout the history of mankind is to build and support some form of an aristocracy.
Click to expand...


Much of that 'exceptional' America has been erased by 30+ years of conservative policies that were a concentrated assault on the middle guy and the little guy. This conservative malfeasance has neither built nor created anything. But the destruction it caused can only be ignored by someone who is so brainwashed that they vote for more of it.

Tort reform IS government intervention. It's bureaucrats dictating what a jury of our peers can or can't do. It undermines our justice system and gives the big guy a baseball bat he can use to beat the final measure of injustice into the little guy. Not only does the person or family suffer from the results of the doctor mistake or negligence, or the corporate toxins or dangerous product, the person and family must also endure the measure of the final insult: 'Yes, you were gravely wronged, but you will not justly compensated'

The whole argument by Republicans on 'tort' reform falls apart and exposes their for the elite agenda. It violates their 'absolutes'. It is government intervention, it ignores states rights and it IS 'statism'. When you start looking into tort reform you find out it has been an ongoing campaign by Republicans, the Chamber of Commerce, insurance companies and manufacturers of dangerous products and chemicals to protect corporations, doctors and hospitals from facing personal responsibility when THEY screw up or are guilty of neglect.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce Continues to Beat Tort Reform Drum

By Bret Hanna - Attorney

There are a number of good sources of information which debunk the myths of tort reform perpetuated by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce who put the interests of corporations before those of the people injured by their corporate negligence and greed. One such source is a blog post by Injury Board member attorney Wayne Parsons which pulls together a great deal of authoritative information on the topic. Others include Blocking the Courthouse Door: How the Republican Party and Its Corporate Allies Are Taking Away Your Right to Sue [obtained by members or by purchase only], The Myth of the Litigation Crisis; Corporate Wolves in Victims' Clothing, and PRI's Corporate-Funded Tort Reform Study Proves Tort Reform Doesn't Work.

The History Of Tort Reform

“It is no secret that, for more than three decades, business interests have invested billions of dollars to sell the public a distorted view of a legal system that is justifiably envied throughout the world. They say rampant litigiousness requires tort “reform” that restricts the legal rights of injured people, not those of businesses suing businesses, which account for most litigation. What they seek, really, is corporate welfare-assurance that their misdeeds will be paid for not by them, but by others.” - Richard H. Middleton, Jr., Past President of the American Association of Justice

Joanne Doroshow, one the best friends the American consumer has ever had exposes one of the great conspiracies of the 2oth century: the tort reform scam - the BIG lie that started long ago:

For the last 15 years, insurance companies, manufacturers of dangerous products and chemicals, the tobacco industry and other major industries have been engaged in a nationwide assault on the civil justice system. In nearly every state and in Congress, corporations and their insurers have waged a relentless campaign to change the laws that give sick and injured consumers the ability to hold their offenders responsible for the injuries they cause. . .
 
Bfgrn said:
MORE standard right wing bullshit. The reason Democrats support programs like Legal Services Corporation is because they HELP people. Your solution is mere speculation. It is not concrete, reliable or consistent. All you can claim is it MAY work.
Click to expand...

So you are claiming that no one performed these services pro bono prior to the Dems creating the access to the Federal tit?

I suggest you educate yourself on liberal programs like the War on Poverty. It was not built on welfare or dependency...it was called the Office of Economic Opportunity for a REASON.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO.... that truly is too funny. Tell me.... how has that war on poverty worked out? How successful it is to ACTUALLY providing the opportunities that will get people OFF of welfare and OUT of poverty?

The war on poverty, like the war on drugs is an abject failure.

As for the remainder of your claptrap.... you are delusional. The poverty rate naturally declines during periods when the overall economy is booming. That is why the poverty rate from 1982-present has remained fairly consistent. Spiking here and there when a recession hits.

But bottom line... the poverty rate has stayed between 12-15% since the mid 60's. It has been predominantly the same families that live in poverty one generation after the next. Because our system is set up for DEPENDENCE on the government. It is not set up to provide a hand up as you proclaim. It is a hand OUT.

The most successful welfare programs in the country are the ones that provide job training.... something that actually provides the hand UP.
 
Superfreak said:
So you are claiming that no one performed these services pro bono prior to the Dems creating the access to the Federal tit?



ROFLMAO.... that truly is too funny. Tell me.... how has that war on poverty worked out? How successful it is to ACTUALLY providing the opportunities that will get people OFF of welfare and OUT of poverty?

The war on poverty, like the war on drugs is an abject failure.

As for the remainder of your claptrap.... you are delusional. The poverty rate naturally declines during periods when the overall economy is booming. That is why the poverty rate from 1982-present has remained fairly consistent. Spiking here and there when a recession hits.

But bottom line... the poverty rate has stayed between 12-15% since the mid 60's. It has been predominantly the same families that live in poverty one generation after the next. Because our system is set up for DEPENDENCE on the government. It is not set up to provide a hand up as you proclaim. It is a hand OUT.

The most successful welfare programs in the country are the ones that provide job training.... something that actually provides the hand UP.
Click to expand...

Job Corps

Job Corps is a program administered by the United States Department of Labor that offers free-of-charge education and vocational training to youth ages 16 to 24.

Job Corps was initiated as the central program of the Johnson Administration's War on Poverty, part of his domestic agenda known as the Great Society. Sargent Shriver, the first Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity, modeled the program on the Depression-era Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC).

Since its inception in 1964 under the Economic Opportunity Act, Job Corps has served more than two million young people. Job Corps serves approximately 60,000 youths annually at Job Corps Centers throughout the country.

Career paths

Career paths offered by Job Corps include:

Advanced manufacturing

* Communication design
* Drafting
* Electronic assembly
* Machine appliance repair
* Machining
* Welding
* Manufacturing technology
* Sign, billboard, and display

Automotive and machine repair

* Automobile technician
* General services technician
* Collision repair and refinish
* Heavy construction equipment mechanic
* Diesel mechanic
* Medium/heavy truck repair
* Electronics tech
* Stationary engineering

Construction

* Bricklaying
* Carpentry
* Cement masonry
* Concrete and terrazzo
* Construction craft laborer
* Electrical
* Electrical overhead line
* Facilities maintenance
* Floor covering
* Glazing
* HVAC
* Industrial engineering technician
* Licensed electrician (bilingual)
* Mechanical engineering technician
* Painting
* Plastering
* Plumbing
* Roto-Rooter plumbing
* Tile setting

Extension programs

* Advanced Career Training (ACT)
* General Educational Development (GED)
* Commercial driver's license (CDL)
* Off-Center Training (OCT Program)
* High school diploma (HSD Program)

Finance and Business

* Accounting services
* Business management
* Clerical occupations
* Legal secretary
* Insurance and financial services
* Marketing
* Medical insurance specialist
* Office administration
* Paralegal
* Purchasing

Health care/allied health professions

* Clinical medical assistant
* Dental assistant
* EKG technician
* Emergency medical technician
* Exercise/massage therapy
* Hemodialysis technician
* Licensed practical/vocational nurse
* Medical office support
* Nurse assistant/home health aide
* Opticianry
* Pharmacy technician
* Phlebotomy
* Physical therapy assistant
* Rehabilitation therapy
* Rehabilitation technician
* Registered nurse
* Respiratory therapy
* Sterile processing
* Surgical technician

Homeland security

* Corrections officer
* Seamanship
* Security and protective services

Hospitality

* Culinary arts
* Hotel and lodging

Information technology

* A+ Microsoft MSCE
* Computer Networking/Cisco
* Computer systems administrator
* Computer support specialist
* Computer technician
* Integrated system tech
* Network cable installation
* Visual communications

Renewable resources and energy

* Forest conservation and urban forestry
* Firefighting
* Wastewater
* Landscaping

Retail sales and services

* Behavioral health aide
* Criminal justice
* Child development
* Residential advisor
* Cosmetology
* Retail sales

Transportation

* Asphalt paving
* Material and distribution operations
* Clerical occupations
* Heavy equipment operations
* Roustabout operator
* Heavy truck driving
* TCU administrative clerk


[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_Corps"]Job Corps - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Question_book-new.svg" class="image"><img alt="Question book-new.svg" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/99/Question_book-new.svg/50px-Question_book-new.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@en/thumb/9/99/Question_book-new.svg/50px-Question_book-new.svg.png[/ame]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top