Lookin' For That Apology...

[NYcarbineer]

Time to give you the spanking that you have been begging for...

1. The interest payment is, as I have documented, $251 billion.

2. Based on the budget for 2011, this is 7%.

3. Clearly your GED diploma didn't cover reading/understanding graphs, as your link/graph did not specify debt interest, merely the allocation of the Treasury Dept that included interest on the debt.

This is the part where you should humbly apologize.

4. You force me to do the work that you should have done to document the point that you thought you were making...
"...interest on the national debt is NOT one of our government's biggest spending programs."

Obama’s 2011 Budget Proposal: How It’s Spent

Obama?s 2011 Budget Proposal: How It?s Spent - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

$3.69 trillon budget proposal

1. Social Security $738 (20%)

2.National Defense $738

3. Income Security $567

4. Medicare $498

5.Net Interest $251 (7%)

6. Health $381

7. Education $122

8. Veteran’s Benefits $122

9. Transportation $91.55

10. International Affairs $67.39
$3,575.94

So, in conclusion, there are five far larger elements in the budget, you are both incorrect and a pompous oaf.

Do you know what the phrase 'one of the biggest' means? And your stupid post doesn't list all programs.

It is not my post that is stupid....

1. Your feeble attempt to hide behind the phrase 'ONE of the biggest' is well past your usual infantile mode, and had gravitated to the dishonest...

Hide behind it? It's the fucking way I originally expressed it.

OK, daveman, entertain us with an explanation as to how this isn't comical denial on PC's part.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Time to give you the spanking that you have been begging for...

1. The interest payment is, as I have documented, $251 billion.

2. Based on the budget for 2011, this is 7%.

3. Clearly your GED diploma didn't cover reading/understanding graphs, as your link/graph did not specify debt interest, merely the allocation of the Treasury Dept that included interest on the debt.

This is the part where you should humbly apologize.

4. You force me to do the work that you should have done to document the point that you thought you were making...
"...interest on the national debt is NOT one of our government's biggest spending programs."

Obama’s 2011 Budget Proposal: How It’s Spent

Obama?s 2011 Budget Proposal: How It?s Spent - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

$3.69 trillon budget proposal

1. Social Security $738 (20%)

2.National Defense $738

3. Income Security $567

4. Medicare $498

5.Net Interest $251 (7%)

6. Health $381

7. Education $122

8. Veteran’s Benefits $122

9. Transportation $91.55

10. International Affairs $67.39
$3,575.94

So, in conclusion, there are five far larger elements in the budget, you are both incorrect and a pompous oaf.

Do you know what the phrase 'one of the biggest' means? And your stupid post doesn't list all programs.

It is not my post that is stupid....

1. Your feeble attempt to hide behind the phrase 'ONE of the biggest' is well past your usual infantile mode, and had gravitated to the dishonest...

2. Since I have documented- more than once- that the figure represents a mere 7% of the budget, it is cowardly and fraudulent to attempt to claim 'see- that's what I meant.." and think that will relieve you of admitting error, and begging pardon.

But- what one has come to expect from your side.

3. Some day, you will reach high school, which, for most folks is a four year period- although, I admit, for you it may take several times that to accomplish, and by your specious argument that four year period would be 'one of the longest periods of ones life.'

Actually, based on your ability- it probably would be 'one of the longest periods of [your] life.'


I can almost believe that you invented stupidity- rather than just perfected it.

How many government programs are there?

 

[xotoxi]

Lookin' For That Apology...

Just FYI...you won't be getting any apology from me, as I did nothing to you or to anyone else.

End of discussion.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Lookin' For That Apology...

Just FYI...you won't be getting any apology from me, as I did nothing to you or to anyone else.

End of discussion.

I apologize to the OP for being unable to shake my chronic affliction of being inappropriately optimistic regarding the intelligence and common sense of my fellow human beings.

 

[The T]

Equality!

Where did this subject come in???


One of my favs...the very ground-floor, prime, genesis of progressivism!

100 to one libs don't understand the difference between equality and liberty!

With them? It's equality of result which is impossible.

The most basic truth is that equality of outcome is a rebuke to individual rights. “The finest opportunity ever given to the world was thrown away because the passion of equality made vain the hope for freedom.” Lord Acton, Lord Acton on Liberty and Government - Gary Galles - Mises Daily

To insure the proper outcomes, and it is a win-win for progressives, as it gives them the ability to use force, and the power of the state: czars, commissions, agencies, panels, ‘experts’….

It's a very good read. I have heard some of this quoted...It's a very nice bookmark, a great read, and I thank you for it.

 

[The T]

Equality!

Where did this subject come in???


One of my favs...the very ground-floor, prime, genesis of progressivism!

100 to one libs don't understand the difference between equality and liberty!

With them? It's equality of result which is impossible.

The most basic truth is that equality of outcome is a rebuke to individual rights. “The finest opportunity ever given to the world was thrown away because the passion of equality made vain the hope for freedom.” Lord Acton, Lord Acton on Liberty and Government - Gary Galles - Mises Daily

To insure the proper outcomes, and it is a win-win for progressives, as it gives them the ability to use force, and the power of the state: czars, commissions, agencies, panels, ‘experts’….

Many here could learn alot from these thoughts.

At all times sincere friends of freedom have been rare...

In every age [liberty's] progress has been beset by its natural enemies: by ignorance and superstition, by lust of conquest and by love of ease, by the strong man's craving for power, and the poor man's craving for food.

By liberty I mean the assurance that every man shall be protected in doing what he believes is his duty, against the influence of authority and majorities, custom and opinion.

Liberty is the prevention of control by others. This requires self-control...

Liberty alone demands, for its realization, the limitation of the public authority, for liberty is the only object which benefits all alike, and provokes no sincere opposition.

Liberty and good government do not exclude each other; and there are excellent reasons why they should go together. Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. It is not for the sake of a good public administration that it is required, but for the security in the pursuit of the highest objects of civil society, and of private life.

Liberty is not the power of doing what we like, but the right of being able to do what we ought.

Liberty enables us to do our duty unhindered by the state, by society, by ignorance and error. We are free in proportion as we are safe from these impediments...

...obscure ethics imply imperfect liberty. For liberty comes not with any ethical system, but with a very developed one.

...sanctifying freedom...teaching men to treasure the liberties of others as their own, and to defend them for the love of justice and charity more than as a claim of right, has been the soul of what is great and good in the progress of the last two hundred years.

...by birth all men are free.

...conscience imperatively demands a corresponding measure of personal liberty...With this no human authority can be permitted to interfere. We are bound to extend to the utmost, and to guard from every encroachment, the sphere in which we can act in obedience to the sole voice of conscience, regardless of any other consideration.

And of course this one that I am sure MANY here have read or heard uttered more than once because it rings so true:

"Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

________________

Explains where this Government is out of touch with the Founders and their intent as to this Republic we are. And more pointedly? How this Administration, and this Government as it exists now are out of bounds.

It must be taken back.

 

[Dr Grump]

Explains where this Government is out of touch with the Founders and their intent as to this Republic we are. And more pointedly? How this Administration, and this Government as it exists now are out of bounds.

It must be taken back.

Off you go then, teabagger....start a revolution....I dare you....

 

[The T]

Explains where this Government is out of touch with the Founders and their intent as to this Republic we are. And more pointedly? How this Administration, and this Government as it exists now are out of bounds.

It must be taken back.

Off you go then, teabagger....start a revolution....I dare you....

Odd you didn't comment on the quotes. YOU don't live here. So you may STFU asswipe.

 

[Dr Grump]

Explains where this Government is out of touch with the Founders and their intent as to this Republic we are. And more pointedly? How this Administration, and this Government as it exists now are out of bounds.

It must be taken back.

Off you go then, teabagger....start a revolution....I dare you....

Odd you didn't comment on the quotes. YOU don't live here. So you may STFU asswipe.

1) No point because you are a partisan hack
2) Make me....

 

[NYcarbineer]

Now that there's a groundswell of opposition to this budget busting disaster of a bill, I think I'm the one owed an apology,

seeing how I was in the small group of wise men here who opposed this from day one.

lol

 

[Gadawg73]

Time to give you the spanking that you have been begging for...

1. The interest payment is, as I have documented, $251 billion.

2. Based on the budget for 2011, this is 7%.

3. Clearly your GED diploma didn't cover reading/understanding graphs, as your link/graph did not specify debt interest, merely the allocation of the Treasury Dept that included interest on the debt.

This is the part where you should humbly apologize.

4. You force me to do the work that you should have done to document the point that you thought you were making...
"...interest on the national debt is NOT one of our government's biggest spending programs."

Obama’s 2011 Budget Proposal: How It’s Spent

Obama?s 2011 Budget Proposal: How It?s Spent - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

$3.69 trillon budget proposal

1. Social Security $738 (20%)

2.National Defense $738

3. Income Security $567

4. Medicare $498

5.Net Interest $251 (7%)

6. Health $381

7. Education $122

8. Veteran’s Benefits $122

9. Transportation $91.55

10. International Affairs $67.39
$3,575.94

So, in conclusion, there are five far larger elements in the budget, you are both incorrect and a pompous oaf.

Do you know what the phrase 'one of the biggest' means? And your stupid post doesn't list all programs.

It is not my post that is stupid....

1. Your feeble attempt to hide behind the phrase 'ONE of the biggest' is well past your usual infantile mode, and had gravitated to the dishonest...

2. Since I have documented- more than once- that the figure represents a mere 7% of the budget, it is cowardly and fraudulent to attempt to claim 'see- that's what I meant.." and think that will relieve you of admitting error, and begging pardon.

But- what one has come to expect from your side.

3. Some day, you will reach high school, which, for most folks is a four year period- although, I admit, for you it may take several times that to accomplish, and by your specious argument that four year period would be 'one of the longest periods of ones life.'

Actually, based on your ability- it probably would be 'one of the longest periods of [your] life.'


I can almost believe that you invented stupidity- rather than just perfected it.

"3. Some day you will reach high school.................."
is a petty grade school girl cat fight remark.
Typical for you.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Of course not. Do you believe the bigger the gap between the rich and poor, the better the condition of the nation?

Is TRAJAN going to answer my question?

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't know whether Trajan saw your question. I do know that the one thing our current fearless leaders don't seem to understand is that the only productive way to narrow the gap between the very rich and very poor is to encourage the very poor to become richer. Any attempt to achieve a better balance by making the very rich less rich will result in more of the very poor or will at least exacerabate their condition.

 

[Gadawg73]

I don't know whether Trajan saw your question. I do know that the one thing our current fearless leaders don't seem to understand is that the only productive way to narrow the gap between the very rich and very poor is to encourage the very poor to become richer. Any attempt to achieve a better balance by making the very rich less rich will result in more of the very poor or will at least exacerabate their condition.

I look back almost 40 years, 4 of which I was in college not making any $$, and find it hard to believe that I have accumulated so much now.
However, what I do have I EARNED.
Most of the wealthy do not have their $$ in a sock drawer as many believe. They have their wealth working for them in the ecomomy and that is how they become wealthier.
Most of us that do make a lot of $$$ have saved most of it and that is how we became wealthy. Same with most all other wealthy.
Tax me more and I have less to invest in the things that have made me wealthy.
Folks, it is investment CAPITAL that grows the economy. Tax the wealthy more and the less investment capital there is to go around.
You get LESS of what you punish and taxes are punishment for productivity.
Just the way capitalism works. Never was intended to be fair. Fair is what comes around every summer and has a ferris wheel.

 

[Foxfyre]

I see it pretty much as Gadawg sees it:

What the working 'poor' contribute to the economy:
1. Labor
2. Purchasers of goods and services.

The non working 'poor' who depend on government entitlements to live almost certainly are taking more out of the economy than they contribute to it.

What the 'rich' (those $250k up to a million or so folks) contribute to the economy:
1. They provide most of the jobs
2. Purchasers of goods, services, and capital investments for the their business.
3. Purchasers of capital - they drive the housing and other real estate markets
4. Primary funders of public services, roads, schools, parks, aesthetic enhancements.
5. Most of the charitable donations
6. Labor
7. Investments

What the 'very rich' (multi-millionaries and up) contribute to the economy in addition to the middle class group:
1. They provide a market for a lot of small business
2. They provide a lot of jobs
3. Purchasers of goods, services, and capital investments for their bsiness.
4. Provide most of the savings creating a pool from which other people can borrow.
5. Provide most of the investments that increase value and help grow small business.
6. Provide most of the venture capital for entreprenours to start small business or for existing businesses to expand product lines and services.
7. Provide most of the financing for big money projects such as sports stadiums, hospital wings, large scale museum exhibits, university facilities, large scale scholarship funds, and foundations.

The middle and high end groups also pay the huge lion's share of all the taxes paid into the U.S. treasury while the working and nonworking 'poor' (just under 50% of the population) pay little or nothing in federal taxes.

Take out that high end group or confiscate the wealth it generates and you will quickly find the middle group staggering which will invariably greatly add to ranks of the working poor and nonworking poor.

But hey that would really level the playing field by increasing the misery at the low end.

 

[PoliticalChic]

With them? It's equality of result which is impossible.

The most basic truth is that equality of outcome is a rebuke to individual rights. “The finest opportunity ever given to the world was thrown away because the passion of equality made vain the hope for freedom.” Lord Acton, Lord Acton on Liberty and Government - Gary Galles - Mises Daily

To insure the proper outcomes, and it is a win-win for progressives, as it gives them the ability to use force, and the power of the state: czars, commissions, agencies, panels, ‘experts’….

Many here could learn alot from these thoughts.

At all times sincere friends of freedom have been rare...

In every age [liberty's] progress has been beset by its natural enemies: by ignorance and superstition, by lust of conquest and by love of ease, by the strong man's craving for power, and the poor man's craving for food.

By liberty I mean the assurance that every man shall be protected in doing what he believes is his duty, against the influence of authority and majorities, custom and opinion.

Liberty is the prevention of control by others. This requires self-control...

Liberty alone demands, for its realization, the limitation of the public authority, for liberty is the only object which benefits all alike, and provokes no sincere opposition.

Liberty and good government do not exclude each other; and there are excellent reasons why they should go together. Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. It is not for the sake of a good public administration that it is required, but for the security in the pursuit of the highest objects of civil society, and of private life.

Liberty is not the power of doing what we like, but the right of being able to do what we ought.

Liberty enables us to do our duty unhindered by the state, by society, by ignorance and error. We are free in proportion as we are safe from these impediments...

...obscure ethics imply imperfect liberty. For liberty comes not with any ethical system, but with a very developed one.

...sanctifying freedom...teaching men to treasure the liberties of others as their own, and to defend them for the love of justice and charity more than as a claim of right, has been the soul of what is great and good in the progress of the last two hundred years.

...by birth all men are free.

...conscience imperatively demands a corresponding measure of personal liberty...With this no human authority can be permitted to interfere. We are bound to extend to the utmost, and to guard from every encroachment, the sphere in which we can act in obedience to the sole voice of conscience, regardless of any other consideration.

And of course this one that I am sure MANY here have read or heard uttered more than once because it rings so true:

"Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

________________

Explains where this Government is out of touch with the Founders and their intent as to this Republic we are. And more pointedly? How this Administration, and this Government as it exists now are out of bounds.

It must be taken back.

Excellent to read and to think about...

I hope someone will start a thread about the difference between liberty and equality.

 

[Foxfyre]

I hope someone will start a thread about the difference between liberty and equality.

I've tried both here on USMB and on other boards. The results are generally two or three comments from conservatives along with a hit from a troll or two and then the subject dies from lack of interest.

It usually goes something like this:

Citizen A and B grow up in the same neighborhood and attend the same school.

Citizen A stays in school and educates himself, stays away from illegal substances and out of trouble with the law, takes whatever McJobs he can get to develop references, acquire marketable skills, learn a trade, and develop a work ethic, and then starts at or near the bottom somewhere and works himself into prosperity and respectability in his community.

Citizen B acquires failing grades, drops out of school in favor of partying and gang banging, refuses to work or quits when he gets bored or acquires enough time to draw unemployment, and spends most of his day sprawled in front of the television set or computer along with his beer and cigarettes and is counted among the ranks of the 'poor' and is described as a 'disadvantaged person'.

What obligation does Citizen A have to Citizen B?
What obligation does Citizen B have to Citizen A?
Is Citizen B justified in receiving more in government benefits than is Citizen A and/or his family?
Why?
Is there such a thing as a level playing field or equality of circumstances when you have such different responses to opportunity as this?

Those on the Left who live in that bubble inside the tunnel do not want to address those questions. They want to reword the questions, change them, make them into a different scencarios, but they do not want to address them as they are. They want to blame Citizen B's parents or demonize Citizen A's parents or attribute some other benefit or barrier to explain the unequal results. But they don't want to address the questions as they are.

We can't say we got a pig in a poke in this regard though. Via encounters with Joe the Plumber et al, our fearless leader made it perfectly clear that in his administration, Citizen A was going to be supporting Citizen B.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I hope someone will start a thread about the difference between liberty and equality.

I've tried both here on USMB and on other boards. The results are generally two or three comments from conservatives along with a hit from a troll or two and then the subject dies from lack of interest.

It usually goes something like this:

Citizen A and B grow up in the same neighborhood and attend the same school.

Citizen A stays in school and educates himself, stays away from illegal substances and out of trouble with the law, takes whatever McJobs he can get to develop references, acquire marketable skills, learn a trade, and develop a work ethic, and then starts at or near the bottom somewhere and works himself into prosperity and respectability in his community.

Citizen B acquires failing grades, drops out of school in favor of partying and gang banging, refuses to work or quits when he gets bored or acquires enough time to draw unemployment, and spends most of his day sprawled in front of the television set or computer along with his beer and cigarettes and is counted among the ranks of the 'poor' and is described as a 'disadvantaged person'.

What obligation does Citizen A have to Citizen B?
What obligation does Citizen B have to Citizen A?
Is Citizen B justified in receiving more in government benefits than is Citizen A and/or his family?
Why?
Is there such a thing as a level playing field or equality of circumstances when you have such different responses to opportunity as this?

Those on the Left who live in that bubble inside the tunnel do not want to address those questions. They want to reword the questions, change them, make them into a different scencarios, but they do not want to address them as they are. They want to blame Citizen B's parents or demonize Citizen A's parents or attribute some other benefit or barrier to explain the unequal results. But they don't want to address the questions as they are.

We can't say we got a pig in a poke in this regard though. Via encounters with Joe the Plumber et al, our fearless leader made it perfectly clear that in his administration, Citizen A was going to be supporting Citizen B.

That is too bad....

But I had in mind something along the lines of defining what is meant by 'equality,' and the mistaken attempts to realign it in some way...

1. de Tocqueville wrote about the uniquely American view of equality versus freedom: "In America, it is freedom that is old- equality is of comparatively modern date.” Alexis de Tocqueville, “Democracy in America,” vol.2, p. 789.

a. At Gettysburg, Lincoln reminded all that the country was “conceived in liberty , and dedicated o the proposition that all men are created equal.”

b. And John F. Kennedy, at a college graduation in ’63, “All of us do not have equal talent, but all of us should have an equal opportunity to develop those talents.” Applewhite, Evans III, Frothingham, “And I Quote, “ p. 78.

c. Isn’t that what John Locke meant, as government “respecting people as equals”? Jeremy Waldron, “God, Locke, and Equality: Christian Foundations in Locke's Political Thought” p. 9.

d. “There is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents.” Thomas Jefferson in a letter to John Adams, October 28, 1813, Lyman T. Sargent, “Political Thought in the United States, “ p. 161. He understood that in this country, nobility was based not on birthright, but rather on individual achievement.


So, the original concept of equality meant acceptance of the differences in what each of us was born with.

From that idea, we accept that outcomes will not, of necessity, be equivalent.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well that brings us to the next scenario.

Citizens A and B are born in pretty equal circumstances in a low income urban neighborhood.

They attend the same school, are assigned the same teachers, and put in pretty much the same effort and prepare themselves to support themselves and a family in adulthood.

But Citizen A is a bit quicker than Citizen B on the schoolwork or excels more in sports and wins himself a scholarship to a prestigious school. Citizen B has to settle for the local university. To make a long story short, Citizen A ultimately lands a very lucrative position with a prestigious firm and eventually become owner and CEO of his own firm where he makes lots of money that allows him to live in the best part of town, buy a Country Club membership, and send his kids to the best private schools.

Citizen B gets a job that will support him and his family, but he doesn't advance much out of the old neighborhood and his kids go to the local public schools.

Unfair? Something that should be equalized or adjusted? Should the government assess a higher percentage of taxes on Citizen A because he is doing so well? Or is it good and right that he pay a lot in taxes and Citizen B pay little or none? Or should Citizen A be required to subsidize Citizen B to make it more equal?

You won't find many leftists who want to answer those questions either.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I see it pretty much as Gadawg sees it:

What the working 'poor' contribute to the economy:
1. Labor
2. Purchasers of goods and services.

The non working 'poor' who depend on government entitlements to live almost certainly are taking more out of the economy than they contribute to it.

What the 'rich' (those $250k up to a million or so folks) contribute to the economy:
1. They provide most of the jobs
2. Purchasers of goods, services, and capital investments for the their business.
3. Purchasers of capital - they drive the housing and other real estate markets
4. Primary funders of public services, roads, schools, parks, aesthetic enhancements.
5. Most of the charitable donations
6. Labor
7. Investments

What the 'very rich' (multi-millionaries and up) contribute to the economy in addition to the middle class group:
1. They provide a market for a lot of small business
2. They provide a lot of jobs
3. Purchasers of goods, services, and capital investments for their bsiness.
4. Provide most of the savings creating a pool from which other people can borrow.
5. Provide most of the investments that increase value and help grow small business.
6. Provide most of the venture capital for entreprenours to start small business or for existing businesses to expand product lines and services.
7. Provide most of the financing for big money projects such as sports stadiums, hospital wings, large scale museum exhibits, university facilities, large scale scholarship funds, and foundations.

The middle and high end groups also pay the huge lion's share of all the taxes paid into the U.S. treasury while the working and nonworking 'poor' (just under 50% of the population) pay little or nothing in federal taxes.

Take out that high end group or confiscate the wealth it generates and you will quickly find the middle group staggering which will invariably greatly add to ranks of the working poor and nonworking poor.

But hey that would really level the playing field by increasing the misery at the low end.

50% of the population are the non-working poor?

lol