OT government



On May 31, 6:50 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:a905879c-e5b8-400e-a4d2-8e37c1635493@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > It's just you.  "Infinitely" worse?  There is no industrialized nation
> > that even approached economic destruction over public health
> > insurance.  Please describe, with figures, this economic destruction.

>
> http://brillig.com/debt_clock/


What on earth are you smoking? The debt clock was going backwards
during the Clinton administration. "Public health insurance," vis.,
Medicare and Medicaid were created during the Johnson administration.
Not that Johnson was a great president, but the economy was smoking
hot in '65 -67 (starting to overheat in fact). Personal income was
growing at a record rate. Too bad about that war thing. Good object
lesson ignored by GWB.

BTW, Bush created the Medicare drug benefit. The benefit is over-
priced because it was guaranteed to line industry pockets (because the
federal government was forbidden from screwing down payments to drug
makers). Another great fleece tax payers to benefit corporations
program. Also, Social Security and Medicare are over-funded -- and the
excess is going in to the general fund. It is the great hidden tax
used to pay for things like no-bid Halliburton contracts. If the
excess over current liabilities was put in to a real pension plan like
a PERS (rather then going in to the general fund), we would be
swimming in retirement dough. But then that would require GWB to
raise regular income tax to cover his idiotic war. -- Jay Beattie.
 
On May 31, 6:50 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:a905879c-e5b8-400e-a4d2-8e37c1635493@y38g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > It's just you. "Infinitely" worse? There is no industrialized nation
> > that even approached economic destruction over public health
> > insurance. Please describe, with figures, this economic destruction.

>
> http://brillig.com/debt_clock/


Wow, that really doesn't even address the question, or back up your
claim.

I guess when you're short on facts, reason and ideology, change the
subject, huh?

Answer the question I posed previously, and your point may be up for
discussion. Otherwise, you're just another brainwashed lemming re-
spewing right wing propaganda.

E.P.
 
"Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:94ac349a-dd25-4f69-ab37-78fc5d454599@x19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On May 31, 6:50 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> >
> > http://brillig.com/debt_clock/

>
> What on earth are you smoking? The debt clock was going backwards
> during the Clinton administration.


Sorry but there was never a time since the Eisenhower administration when
the public debt wasn't rising.

> BTW, Bush created the Medicare drug benefit. The benefit is over-
> priced because it was guaranteed to line industry pockets (because the
> federal government was forbidden from screwing down payments to drug
> makers).


I realize that Marxists don't understand free trade but most people
understand that the government isn't supposed to be competing with
commercial businesses since there is a certain advantage to not having to
pay taxes.

Perhaps you'd like to explain why essentially EVERY drug company in the
world makes almost 100% of their profit from a single drug? And that MOST of
that profit goes into trying to develop another drug before that one runs
out its patent?

Look, I worked in several drug companies and just to qualify a drug requires
over $100 million these days. If you don't have any idea what the hell
you're talking about I suggest you take your grade school economics and
quietly stand in the corner.

> Also, Social Security and Medicare are over-funded -- and the
> excess is going in to the general fund. It is the great hidden tax
> used to pay for things like no-bid Halliburton contracts.


Again you prove your ignorance concerning SS and Medicare. Please learn
something before publishing blatant BS.

BTW - you also prove your stupidity about no-bid contracts. These things
usually end up CHEAPER than bid contracts and they require a great deal less
time between NEED for equipment and DELIVERY of said equipment.

I'm not surprised that there are so many people here who are willing to take
anti-administration positions without ever bothering to actually know what
the hell they're talking about. After all, most of you here are below the
worker bee on the scale.
 
"Ed Pirrero" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:a67412f2-2f1c-4d84-a7e9-517ae69a6d3b@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Answer the question I posed previously, and your point may be up for
> discussion. Otherwise, you're just another brainwashed lemming re-
> spewing right wing propaganda.


I love it when people like you refer to the national debt as "right wing
propaganda".
 
On May 31, 2:38 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:

> ... the hell they're talking about. After all, most of you here are below the
> worker bee on the scale.


Ah, perspective emerges.
 
"Dan O" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:f251c948-d8c9-43a2-adcd-5c2d0565a20d@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On May 31, 2:38 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
>> ... the hell they're talking about. After all, most of you here are below
>> the
>> worker bee on the scale.

>
> Ah, perspective emerges.


Perspective from age and not from position Dan. Since the '60's we've seen
the "Tear it all down, Man" crowd in action based almost solely on false
beliefs.
 
On May 31, 2:39 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:a67412f2-2f1c-4d84-a7e9-517ae69a6d3b@e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Answer the question I posed previously, and your point may be up for
> > discussion. Otherwise, you're just another brainwashed lemming re-
> > spewing right wing propaganda.

>
> I love it when people like you refer to the national debt as "right wing
> propaganda".


It would be funny, if that is what I actually did.

I guess with all the propaganda you've been swallowing, you have no
room for actual thought or logic.

The debt has NOTHING to do with your claim, nor my response. In logic
circles, that's called a non sequitur. In this case, you are using it
as a red herring, in order to construct a straw man (the text to which
I am responding.)

You may, at your leisure, look up all of those logic terms.

When you have a real point, get back to me.

E.P.
 
On May 31, 2:51 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Dan O" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:f251c948-d8c9-43a2-adcd-5c2d0565a20d@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On May 31, 2:38 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:

>
> >> ... the hell they're talking about. After all, most of you here are below
> >> the
> >> worker bee on the scale.

>
> > Ah, perspective emerges.

>
> Perspective from age and not from position Dan. Since the '60's we've seen
> the "Tear it all down, Man" crowd in action based almost solely on false
> beliefs.


You don't have perspective, you have dogma. When you have no clue how
to use logic, when you don't know the meanings of the words
"communist" and "socialist", one has to question not only your
perspective, but your ability to think and reason.

40 year old spewing dogma and propaganda and 70 year old spewing
propaganda - age makes no difference.

Your emotional ranting only serves to make you look like a buffoon.

E.P.
 
On May 31, 2:38 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:94ac349a-dd25-4f69-ab37-78fc5d454599@x19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On May 31, 6:50 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > >http://brillig.com/debt_clock/

>
> > What on earth are you smoking?  The debt clock was going backwards
> > during the Clinton administration.

>
> Sorry but there was never a time since the Eisenhower administration when
> the public debt wasn't rising.


You're right. So let me amend my prior statement: "What on earth are
you smoking, the debt clock was not spinning out of control during the
Clinton administration." There. I was thinking of budget deficit
reduction and not national debt, but anyway, Clinton grew the debt by
one-third of a percent. GWB on the other hand has grown it by more
than twenty times the Clinton rate.

> > BTW, Bush created the Medicare drug benefit.  The benefit is over-
> > priced because it was guaranteed to line industry pockets (because the
> > federal government was forbidden from screwing down payments to drug
> > makers).

>
> I realize that Marxists don't understand free trade but most people
> understand that the government isn't supposed to be competing with
> commercial businesses since there is a certain advantage to not having to
> pay taxes.


The government is not competing with commercial businesses, it is
acting as a consumer in the market -- a consumer with huge buying
power. Governments do this all the time -- buying big expensive
failed missile systems and planes, etc., etc. Buying drugs is no
different than buying text books for public schools -- and of course,
if some publisher charged $500 for a spelling work-book and the
government paid the charge, then you and I and everyone would scream
to high heaven.

>
> Perhaps you'd like to explain why essentially EVERY drug company in the
> world makes almost 100% of their profit from a single drug? And that MOST of
> that profit goes into trying to develop another drug before that one runs
> out its patent?


Now, I have a little experience in this area because my uncle Bill was
president of Pfizer, and he was always working on keeping a bunch of
drugs in the pipe line and in extending the patents on existing
drugs. Pfizer was not a one profitable drug company -- and at any
given time, it was making money on a lot of drugs -- from Viagra
(which my uncle brought to market) to the (oops) Cox-2 inhibitors to
the heart meds, Lipitor (co-marketed), etc. All of those were in
patent, and even the drugs with expiring patents were extended with
new dosing regimens -- which do not require a whole lot of R&D, AFAIK.
Bill also put a butt-load of money into R&D because he was very
forward thinking and not out to make a quick profit off a drug or a
merger. We did not see eye to eye on the pricing issues, though,
particularly the disparity beetween the price in the USA and the price
everywhere else.

>
> Look, I worked in several drug companies and just to qualify a drug requires
> over $100 million these days. If you don't have any idea what the hell
> you're talking about I suggest you take your grade school economics and
> quietly stand in the corner.


See above
>
> > Also, Social Security and Medicare are over-funded -- and the
> > excess is going in to the general fund.  It is the great hidden tax
> > used to pay for things like no-bid Halliburton contracts.

>
> Again you prove your ignorance concerning SS and Medicare. Please learn
> something before publishing blatant BS.


What is wrong with my statement? Is it not true that social security
trust fund payments are being used for general fund purposes and to
reduce the budget deficit?


> BTW - you also prove your stupidity about no-bid contracts. These things
> usually end up CHEAPER than bid contracts and they require a great deal less
> time between NEED for equipment and DELIVERY of said equipment.


How would you know? Really, without a bid how can you say a no-bid
contract is cheaper? Local governments are allowed to skip the
bidding process for routine expenses (like buying paper from Office
Depot), and I can see taking a no-bid contract for emergency expenses,
but if I were president, I wouldn't take a no-bid contract from the
Vice President's former company. It looks bad -- really bad. And can
you say Halliburton did not rip us off?

> I'm not surprised that there are so many people here who are willing to take
> anti-administration positions without ever bothering to actually know what
> the hell they're talking about. After all, most of you here are below the
> worker bee on the scale.


Tom, what does it mean to be below the worker bee on the scale? What
scale? It is easy to take an anti-administration position because GWB
is the worst president during my life -- which started in the
Eisenhower administration. Even Nixon was more effective -- oooh,
that's right, he was an evil Marxist because he froze prices and
wages. I can't remember the last time the American dollar was below
the Canadian dollar -- and let's not talk about the Euro. This
president f***** up my European vacation plans! No other president
has ever done that.

Now, if I am missing some up-side of GWB, please let me know. I am
open to correction. -- Jay Beattie.
 
On May 31, 2:51 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Dan O" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:f251c948-d8c9-43a2-adcd-5c2d0565a20d@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On May 31, 2:38 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:

>
> >> ... the hell they're talking about. After all, most of you here are below
> >> the
> >> worker bee on the scale.

>
> > Ah, perspective emerges.

>
> Perspective from age and not from position Dan. Since the '60's we've seen
> the "Tear it all down, Man" crowd in action based almost solely on false
> beliefs.


Nobody on this NG wants to over-throw the government. I think people
are justifiably upset about their respective standards of living going
down the toilet. Anyone who paid attention over the last 50 years can
say with a fair amount of confidence that there was no worse president
than George W. Bush. O.K., maybe Jimmy Carter comes close, but GWB
still beats him out for the all time lowest approval rating of any
president (19% in February of this year). Go Curious George! -- Jay
Beattie.
 
"Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:f31b2d00-568c-4c0e-be6d-d0377bc050a5@w34g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
On May 31, 2:38 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry but there was never a time since the Eisenhower administration
> > when
> > the public debt wasn't rising.

>
> You're right. So let me amend my prior statement: "What on earth are
> you smoking, the debt clock was not spinning out of control during the
> Clinton administration."


In case you missed it - it was the correct actions of RONALD REAGAN that
turned the economy around in time for Clinton to take the credit. If you
BOTHERED to look at the national spending you'd have seen that without that
roaring economy we'd have had awful debt growth at that time as well.

And I'm NOT blaming Clinton - the stink goes where it belongs - on a
Congress that believes that you can improve the entire world by running ever
increasing debts.

> Tom, what does it mean to be below the worker bee on the scale? What
> scale?


It means that people like Pirrero can call names without EVER having tried
to do any better himself.

> Now, if I am missing some up-side of GWB, please let me know. I am
> open to correction.


I never said that there was an upside to Bush. I said that there was a FAR
worse downside to his opponents.
 
On May 31, 7:26 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:f31b2d00-568c-4c0e-be6d-d0377bc050a5@w34g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> On May 31, 2:38 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > Sorry but there was never a time since the Eisenhower administration
> > > when
> > > the public debt wasn't rising.

>
> > You're right.  So let me amend my prior statement: "What on earth are
> > you smoking, the debt clock was not spinning out of control during the
> > Clinton administration."

>
> In case you missed it - it was the correct actions of RONALD REAGAN that
> turned the economy around in time for Clinton to take the credit. If you
> BOTHERED to look at the national spending you'd have seen that without that
> roaring economy we'd have had awful debt growth at that time as well.
>
> And I'm NOT blaming Clinton - the stink goes where it belongs - on a
> Congress that believes that you can improve the entire world by running ever
> increasing debts.
>
> > Tom, what does it mean to be below the worker bee on the scale?  What
> > scale?

>
> It means that people like Pirrero can call names without EVER having tried
> to do any better himself.
>
> > Now, if I am missing some up-side of GWB, please let me know.  I am
> > open to correction.

>
> I never said that there was an upside to Bush. I said that there was a FAR
> worse downside to his opponents.


I don't know if that is true. I get the sense that throwing dice or
using the Magic Eight-Ball would have given us better quality
decisions. -- Jay Beattie.
 
On May 31, 7:26 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> > Tom, what does it mean to be below the worker bee on the scale? What
> > scale?

>
> It means that people like Pirrero can call names without EVER having tried
> to do any better himself.
>


Better than what? By measure of salary? Standard of living? Tax
bracket? Education?

Luckily, I find no dishonor in being a worker bee - I started at the
bottom of my profession doing exactly that. And if you count growing
up on a farm as "worker bee", then I spent all of my childhood and
teen years that way too. Now, I have bees working for me. And, I did
it all on my own dime.

The industrial might of this country was built on the backs of worker
bees, Tom. Fascism was defeated by the hard work and sacrifice of
those worker bees. So, in addition to you being ignorant about the
political spectrum and logic, add history to the mix.

Calling a fool a fool is just being honest. Impolite, but honest.
Calling a person who is willfully ignorant an idiot is likewise just
being honest. Educate yourself, Tom, and throw away the rightwing-
colored glasses. You might gain the perspective you think you have,
but seriously lack.

E.P.
 
On May 31, 7:18 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
>
> Do you suppose 60 years of deficit financing the US budget until we are now
> $10 trillion in the hole can be blamed on one President and not 60 years of
> American voter greed?


Add to that your own greed, Tom.

> I don't like Bush but the alternative in both elections was even worse.


Nonsense. At his core, Al Gore is a center-right politician. For all
the bloviating done on the right about his environmentalism, if you
actual examine his voting record, it wasn't all that liberal. And he
knew about how to get a federal budget nearer to balance.

You screwed up, Tom - you listened to the propaganda from the
rightwing blowhards, and damaged your country by voting for the wrong
guy. And now, you're going to get to pay for that mistake, and
dearly. And so will your children, and grandchildren.

Just like my grandchildren, children and me.

E.p.
 
"Ed Pirrero" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:a9ebfd2a-dc88-44ce-92f8-e733fbdeb5bb@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On May 31, 7:18 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
>> I don't like Bush but the alternative in both elections was even worse.

>
> Nonsense. At his core, Al Gore is a center-right politician.


I guess that's why he is touring the country telling people that by 2011
that Americans will be eating each other due to global warming. I suggest
that you get help for that Al Gore-ism.
 
"Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:ce914144-3208-4372-bc62-578cd2b43272@z24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On May 31, 7:26 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> >
> > I never said that there was an upside to Bush. I said that there was a
> > FAR
> > worse downside to his opponents.

>
> I don't know if that is true. I get the sense that throwing dice or
> using the Magic Eight-Ball would have given us better quality
> decisions.


Jay, that gives me the idea that you've never done anything yourself.
 
On Jun 1, 6:55 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:a9ebfd2a-dc88-44ce-92f8-e733fbdeb5bb@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On May 31, 7:18 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:

>
> >> I don't like Bush but the alternative in both elections was even worse.

>
> > Nonsense. At his core, Al Gore is a center-right politician.

>
> I guess that's why he is touring the country telling people that by 2011
> that Americans will be eating each other due to global warming.


And you wonder why someone might consider you an idiot. LOL.

E.P.
 
On Jun 1, 6:57 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:ce914144-3208-4372-bc62-578cd2b43272@z24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On May 31, 7:26 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > I never said that there was an upside to Bush. I said that there was a
> > > FAR
> > > worse downside to his opponents.

>
> > I don't know if that is true. I get the sense that throwing dice or
> > using the Magic Eight-Ball would have given us better quality
> > decisions.

>
> Jay, that gives me the idea that you've never done anything yourself.


Tom, that gives me the idea that you've never actually had any ideas
that were truly your own.

E.P.
 
On Jun 1, 6:57 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:ce914144-3208-4372-bc62-578cd2b43272@z24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On May 31, 7:26 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > I never said that there was an upside to Bush. I said that there was a
> > > FAR
> > > worse downside to his opponents.

>
> > I don't know if that is true.  I get the sense that throwing dice or
> > using the Magic Eight-Ball would have given us better quality
> > decisions.

>
> Jay, that gives me the idea that you've never done anything yourself.


What do you mean? I don't think there is anything I haven't done
myself -- except for sew my own wounds (unlike Muzi), although I have
used quite a few Steri-Strips. Do you think Bush has done better than
a monkey-score on Iraq? I don't. One of my many college employments
was teaching English as a second language to Arabs -- mostly Saudis.
Arabs do not act or think like Americans. I could have told you (as
could anyone with half a brain), that rebuilding Iraq would be harder
than herding cats. GWB though he could do the Marshall Plan in Iraq --
which was either supidity or self-delusion. Why do you think everyone
is lining up to criticize the on-going "war" in Iraq -- from both
parties? Why do you think GWB has the lowest approval rating of any
president -- ever? You criticize social welfare programs, and look,
we have a gigantic one going in Iraq. How could Gore or Kerry have
done worse? -- Jay Beattie.
 
"Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:0ae32e02-5df9-4074-a10f-61c693b50995@p39g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 1, 6:57 am, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> > "Jay Beattie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:ce914144-3208-4372-bc62-578cd2b43272@z24g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> > On May 31, 7:26 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> > > > I never said that there was an upside to Bush. I said that there was
> > > > a
> > > > FAR worse downside to his opponents.

> >
> > > I don't know if that is true. I get the sense that throwing dice or
> > > using the Magic Eight-Ball would have given us better quality
> > > decisions.

> >
> > Jay, that gives me the idea that you've never done anything yourself.

>
> What do you mean? I don't think there is anything I haven't done
> myself -- except for sew my own wounds (unlike Muzi), although I have
> used quite a few Steri-Strips.


Then why are you talking about stuff that you can't possibly have any real
information on and pretending that you understand the circumstances that
related to the decisions?

> Do you think Bush has done better than
> a monkey-score on Iraq? I don't. One of my many college employments
> was teaching English as a second language to Arabs -- mostly Saudis.
> Arabs do not act or think like Americans. I could have told you (as
> could anyone with half a brain), that rebuilding Iraq would be harder
> than herding cats.


And yet my experience with Arab engineers has been exactly the opposite - we
agreed on almost everything and they always seemed to use scientific method.

> GWB though he could do the Marshall Plan in Iraq --
> which was either supidity or self-delusion.


Perhaps you'd like to offer an alternative?

> Why do you think everyone
> is lining up to criticize the on-going "war" in Iraq


Because its the 'in' thing to do now. Certainly not because you know
anything about the problems.

> Why do you think GWB has the lowest approval rating of any
> president -- ever?


Because of the media. This is the result of an almost entirely Liberal
media.

> You criticize social welfare programs, and look,
> we have a gigantic one going in Iraq. How could Gore or Kerry have
> done worse?


If we had bombed Iraq and left you'd sure as hell have seen a whole lot
worse situation than we're seeing now. The Sunnis and Shiites are beginning
to govern TOGETHER. Of course the US media is doing just about everything
possible to hide that but the fact is that within a couple of years Iraq
will be self sufficient and a shining example of democracy in the middle
east.
 

Similar threads