Fiscal responsibility: suppose the govt "doesn't spend money it doesn't have."

[franklin]

I looked into your Son of Boss stuff yesterday. It was pretty damn funny the logic being used by the selling brokers. I got a good chuckle at the extreme lengths they took to avoid taxes. Justia has a follow up to the original case and has a long bullet point list summarizing the mechanism. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cafc/09-5007/09-5007-2011-03-27.html I don't see how Romney explains this one away.

It's a good thing Ronald Reagan implemented legislation that was able to stop these kinds of loopholes (Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982).

 

[Jazz Spazz]

Republicans are better at organizing around parsimonious one-liners. These are the "virtues" about which they will not compromise ("if the government would just stop spending money it didn't have;" "seems pretty simple, actually"). These are very effective hubs around which support is rallied -- and these supporters don't necessarily have to understand the full-scale repercussions of their positions because any supposed ill caused in the HERE and NOW is explained away as a painful change for a better tomorrow (for more on this see Povinelli's new book Economies of Abandonment). In this way, these "political virtues" tap into moral ideologies that look a lot like religion or are explicitly religious (see Jazzspazz). Separation between church and State, eh? Protestant work ethic is still the political motto of our era.

Democrats have different affect-laden organizing criteria.

You mean Democrats like to talk in circles chasing their own tails, while not understanding anything about the big picture. (see naos) See, I can call names too. I'm rubber and you're glue, whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks onto you... bam!!! ha ha, I win, no take backs.... infiniti. Yo mama.

 

[NAOS]

I looked into your Son of Boss stuff yesterday. It was pretty damn funny the logic being used by the selling brokers. I got a good chuckle at the extreme lengths they took to avoid taxes. Justia has a follow up to the original case and has a long bullet point list summarizing the mechanism. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cafc/09-5007/09-5007-2011-03-27.html I don't see how Romney explains this one away.

It's a good thing Ronald Reagan implemented legislation that was able to stop these kinds of loopholes (Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982).

nice. Thanks for the link.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

I think we all know the answer to this question...

But why bother actually looking things up when your #1 goal is to promote an ideology?

Thanks for chiming in with "nothing of substance". You are welcome naos for posting this in your behalf.
Again Thriller, you chime in with your own agenda and know nothing of which you speak.

 

[NAOS]

You mean Democrats like to talk in circles chasing their own tails, while not understanding anything about the big picture. (see naos) See, I can call names too. I'm rubber and you're glue, whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks onto you... bam!!! ha ha, I win, no take backs.... infiniti. Yo mama.

^ would Jesus have done that? ^

Are you denying that your political ethos map heavily onto your religious ethos? That's all I'm saying douchie.

BTW, if you had been paying attention at all, then you'd know I'm not a democrat.

 

[NAOS]

^ would Jesus have done that? ^

Are you denying that your political ethos map heavily onto your religious ethos? That's all I'm saying douchie.

BTW, if you had been paying attention at all, then you'd know I'm not a democrat.

Yesterday Spazz was chest thumping about how he was proud to speak in parables in the context of a political discussion. Today, I talk about how masses of republican political virtue are indistinguishable from religious virtue and he has a tantrum. .....And, meanwhile, I'm supposed to be a democrat chasing his tail. Good times.

(maybe I shouldn't have cited him as indicative of a tendency that he claimed to be proud of??? somebody help me here.)

 

[NAOS]

I have to say if you think I speak in parables, I find myself in the best company. If I speak to you in parables, and you don't get it, it means your heart is waxes gross, and your ears are dull of hearing, and your eyes have closed.
It's tough to show someone the light when their eyes are closed.
It's hard to get someone to hear when they are busy talking, or thinking of the next thing they want to say.
It is impossible to open somebody's heart when they already know everything and know where they want to be, no matter what.

We must, as a government, stop spending more than we have to spend. It is a disastrous idea to year after year continue to spend more than we have and expect to be able to pay it back. If we do not stop this policy now we will eventually go down like the Titanic as a country. If we make an attempt to stop it now it will hurt, but we can salvage something. Doing things right takes self control, time, and patience to get to where we want to be... but we are so far in the hole right now that it will be enormously difficult to correct the past mistakes that have been made.

The results of stopping the financial bleeding will hurt, yes... but it will hurt ten times more if we continue driving 120 miles an hour towards the wall of the grand canyon. We need to hit the brakes hard and find a way up the wall. It will take time, patience, guts, and determination... but anything done right and good generally takes those things.

This government is addicted to spending, and no matter how many good causes you justify the spending with, the fact is we just don't have it, period. Anybody that is addicted to something will go through some hard times to make it past the "wall" but it will be worth it.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Sincere question for NAOS. In your opinion, are most repub candidates too uneducated or ill-equipped to make good change or are they simply too catering to the rich to do so?

 

[Stoked]

^ would Jesus have done that? ^

Are you denying that your political ethos map heavily onto your religious ethos? That's all I'm saying douchie.

BTW, if you had been paying attention at all, then you'd know I'm not a democrat.

Do you have to be a follower of Jesus to be a "right winger"? Obviously the majority are but one does not always equal the other.

Lol at Thriller talking about only promoting your ideology.

 

[Stoked]

Sincere question for NAOS. In your opinion, are most repub candidates too uneducated or ill-equipped to make good change or are they simply too catering to the rich to do so?

Honestly I think it is a mixture of both.

The Left is too uneducated and focused on government as the answer to everything to make good change.

In short we are hosed.

 

[NAOS]

Sincere question for NAOS. In your opinion, are most repub candidates too uneducated or ill-equipped to make good change or are they simply too catering to the rich to do so?

Both sides are overly wed to (a) trust in the naturalness of the market, (b) trust that private interests can and should deliver what the State "certainly can't", and (c) narratives about the individual's responsibility for his/her station in life.

I guess I might call this lack of education since there are plenty of long-standing social theories that illustrate how inadequate these platforms are.

EDIT TO ADD: The republican tendencies I mentioned above just really really get under my skin. I can't see how it is good for public discourse. Democrats can be too idealistically egalitarian and relativistic, but I find this easier to work with. Does this answer your question?

 

[NAOS]

btw, was this another unintended compliment?

 

[Jazz Spazz]

Since I work for a hospital that primarily servers homeless people (through government grants) and Medicaid patients, and we lease out my department to a groups of health clinces serving the same clientele, I'm very curious how you think we could improve our efficiency. This is especially true since we serve patients for less than pretthy much any other area hospital on a per captia basis.

Any large organization has wasteful spending, and all large organizations seek to reduce. This is true of the US governmdent (the biggest of all, so the most oppotunity for waste), but it's also true of GM, Anthem/Wellpoint, McDonalds, etc.

Food stamps are based on the cost for a healthy diet based on the number of individuals. I have no idea what you mean by "feed them very well". Have you gone over the contents of the "market basket" this is based on, and compared their price to various local retail outlets?

I would have to be there and know what is going on there to give ideas. You could probably give better ideas as to how to improve efficiency as you are there all the time.

As to the basis for a healthy diet for food stamps, yes I have looked into the pounds of each food by week per age and gender that make up the market basket. I am not going to dig into the details with you because it is pointless. What does have a point is that in real life, families are allowed to buy almost whatever they want on food stamps. The money given based on the basket is in regards to healthy foods, but any unprepared foods are allowed. People don't have to buy fresh vegetables and fruits and living off of the basis for the whole thing, and it is being enabled by the food stamp program. WIC also helps families, but has specific foods that can be bought using their program. Families using the food stamp program can buy frozen pizza and live on that if they want to for the entire month, They can even go to Papa Murphy's take n bake and buy their pizza because it is not prepared and live on that. They can spend the rest of what they don't use on food storage. They are also "encouraged" to spend all of the money given in the program because they are told if they do not use it all, they will probably get less the next month, and nobody wants that... just in case they will need it later. I know of families that get extra food and give it away to neighbors because they can, not because they need it, they also throw away quite a bit of the food they don't end up using or eating. Say what you want about the basket, if the policies do not uphold the basis for the basket it is enabling waste, and I'm not talking a few dollars here and there. You can change the focus, or try to defend this, but this is the reality. It's not a bad program, it just needs some tweaks and improved processes and policies.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

^ would Jesus have done that? ^

Are you denying that your political ethos map heavily onto your religious ethos? That's all I'm saying douchie.

BTW, if you had been paying attention at all, then you'd know I'm not a democrat.

I'm not Jesus.

If you had been paying attention you would know I'm not a Repub. If you couldn't tell I am responding to you because I am tired of your smarter than thou, better than thou attitude and think you need a little opposition. See I can be as douchie as you are in every post.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

btw, was this another unintended compliment?

Na, I never was a Charleston Chew fan, I'm sure he was a good actor and all.

 

[NAOS]

I would have to be there and know what is going on there to give ideas. You could probably give better ideas as to how to improve efficiency as you are there all the time.

As to the basis for a healthy diet for food stamps, yes I have looked into the pounds of each food by week per age and gender that make up the market basket. I am not going to dig into the details with you because it is pointless. What does have a point is that in real life, families are allowed to buy almost whatever they want on food stamps. The money given based on the basket is in regards to healthy foods, but any unprepared foods are allowed. People don't have to buy fresh vegetables and fruits and living off of the basis for the whole thing, and it is being enabled by the food stamp program. WIC also helps families, but has specific foods that can be bought using their program. Families using the food stamp program can buy frozen pizza and live on that if they want to for the entire month, They can even go to Papa Murphy's take n bake and buy their pizza because it is not prepared and live on that. They can spend the rest of what they don't use on food storage. They are also "encouraged" to spend all of the money given in the program because they are told if they do not use it all, they will probably get less the next month, and nobody wants that... just in case they will need it later. I know of families that get extra food and give it away to neighbors because they can, not because they need it, they also throw away quite a bit of the food they don't end up using or eating. Say what you want about the basket, if the policies do not uphold the basis for the basket it is enabling waste, and I'm not talking a few dollars here and there. You can change the focus, or try to defend this, but this is the reality. It's not a bad program, it just needs some tweaks and improved processes and policies.

meanwhile, an exec trading financial derivatives gets a bonus of $*** million dollars.

edit to add: I can see now how you don't have opinions against the poor, in general. I guess the problem is managing the poor well, and then having opinions about the "bad poor".

 

[NAOS]

I'm not Jesus.

If you had been paying attention you would know I'm not a Repub. If you couldn't tell I am responding to you because I am tired of your smarter than thou, better than thou attitude and think you need a little opposition. See I can be as douchie as you are in every post.

really, dude, you're gonna have to stop being a stereotype if you want to be true opposition. But, when you do that, you'll find that we have plenty to talk about.

 

[One Brow]

As to the basis for a healthy diet for food stamps, yes I have looked into the pounds of each food by week per age and gender that make up the market basket. I am not going to dig into the details with you because it is pointless. What does have a point is that in real life, families are allowed to buy almost whatever they want on food stamps. The money given based on the basket is in regards to healthy foods, but any unprepared foods are allowed.

I agree that is a weakness and a fault. Food stamps are designed to cover a healthy diet, but healthy food is often more expensive than many of the unhealthy foods, as well as less appealing when you've been raised on the unhealthy foods.

However, outside of restricting what foods you can buy on food stamps, establishing a separate price structure for unhealthy foods so th=ey cost more on food stamps, o similar notions that make the food stamp program mush more regulated and complex, I'm not sure what the solution would be. If you just cut baqck on the funds, you force people to make th eunhealthy choice.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

I agree that is a weakness and a fault. Food stamps are designed to cover a healthy diet, but healthy food is often more expensive than many of the unhealthy foods, as well as less appealing when you've been raised on the unhealthy foods.

However, outside of restricting what foods you can buy on food stamps, establishing a separate price structure for unhealthy foods so th=ey cost more on food stamps, o similar notions that make the food stamp program mush more regulated and complex, I'm not sure what the solution would be. If you just cut baqck on the funds, you force people to make th eunhealthy choice.

True, then change what can be bought like they do with WIC and start there... reevaluate after.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

really, dude, you're gonna have to stop being a stereotype if you want to be true opposition. But, when you do that, you'll find that we have plenty to talk about.

I've seen how you talk to people, not sure I want to talk with you. How you talk to people is the main reason you get the reaction you get from me. You sure you are not Jesus, because you seem to condescend quite a bit.