Majority Leader Eric Cantor touts strategy to grow economy

[Dot Com]

The right wing is missing the point. You can cut all you want, but if the economy isn't growing, and it won't as long as the entire nation's wealth is concentrated in the hands of just 1%, the cuts will never be enough. The economy has to grow.

Cutting support for education is simply carving away at the nation's future. Growing corn and cotton won't be enough.

Agreed. Austerity alone isn't the answer especially the type that further punishes the poor (the conservatives favorite target, reaping minimal gains as a % of the debt) Why is it that when there's an economic downturn, the Repubs go after the lower classes and leave the upper- middle classes and upper- classes out of the solution when their *cough* 'investments' invariably led to the down-turn in the first place? If Cantor REALLY wanted to look at austerity measures, he could have addressed increasing the retirement age for SS and increasing out-of-pocket-expenses for Medicare as Rand Paul proposed during his campaign.

I believe there is more to it than going after SS and Medicare. First, if they want roll back a program, the Republicans should be rolling back their "drugs for votes" bill passed under Bush through RECONCILIATION that some estimates say will cost 5 to 7 trillion dollars.

Second, the first law Republicans should change is the one keeping states and HMOs from purchasing "bulk" medicine. Other countries will consolidate their drug requirements and purchase in bulk which drives down the cost. Republicans made sure this can't happen here. Every HMO can only purchase for that HMO.

Republicans have made sure everything in this country is slanted towards business making lots and lots of money.

As far as SS, do right wingers really want to see 70 old police or firemen or medics? Here in Illinois, there are more than 700 police between 60 and 65 (I previously published that link after being challenged by a right winger). So we want them to be between 65 and 70?

What about people who never paid into SS who get it? I'm not talking widows or kids of those who paid in, but those who gamed the system.

What about people who have 5 million dollars or more? What is a few hundred a month to them?

People paid into SS their entire working lives. What about them?

And what about our military? If Republicans weren't so hellbent on tying us to foreign oil (why is that?), we have the technology to create all the energy we need. Screw the middle east. Unfortunately, they screw us.

There are sharp differences between the two parties. Very sharp.

There are stark realities to SS. Less people are paying in than there were in the beginning. Changes will have to be made but Cantor & co. don't want to go there for obvious reasons. Those two programs, SS & Medicare, are the lions share of government spending, which, if modified, can reap huge savings. The President already instructed the Sec of Defense to cut out 10% of the fat at the Pentagon which he has done so, you can't go there although I'm sure there's more savings to be had as alot of the stuff are pet projects in Congressmen's districts to garner votes at the expense of the tax- payers $.

 

[rdean]

Putting the issues under the right authority would do a lot to clear the federal deficit. The states or local governments are more responsive to the people, if they don't have the largesse of the Fed as an alternative and master.

It's more than just "placing the blame". It's about competing ideologies.

One ideology wants growth and education and research and job creation and new technology.

The other ideology wants tax cuts for the wealthy, and spending - but only on the military, and to slash funding for, not only education, but also slash funding for: rebuilding the infrastructure, researching new technology, destroying unions and removing regulations for clean air and clean water so corporations can squeeze every cent they can out of the country.

This is one of those few cases where there really is two sharply defined ideologies which translates into opposing choices.

You can cut spending all you want, but if the economy isn't growing, it will never be enough.

I mentioned blame, where? Sides, where? Ideologies, where?

The public is not nearly as incapable as some liberals presume or some Republicans hope. Indeed, the past 4 years have taught some lessons that many under 60 never learned about personal behavior and public domains.

Jobs will follow when the federal government does what it's supposed to and gets out of the areas where it has no business. Don't go all apeshit that implies no regulations, it doesn't.

Those vanilla statements with nothing to back them up always amaze me. The single largest contributer to the "world's economy" is a US government program called NASA.

1,400 documented NASA inventions have benefited U.S. industry, improved the quality of life and created jobs for not just Americans, but around the world - Republicans don't even believe in science.

NASA Spinoffs - Inventions Benefiting Our Daily Lives - Apollo Spinoff Inventions

 

[boedicca]

Social Security is worth LESS THAN ZERO. The repayment of the money the government borrowed from the Trust Fund (one of the biggest Orwellian scams EVAH), the interest on the debt to make the repayment, and the higher taxes on future workers are going to destroy economic growth. We need real GDP growth of over 3% to keep up with population growth. The SS tsunami is going to retard growth to a level where structural unemployment will remain high, and the debt-tax requirements to cover the beneficiary burden subject future generations to much lower living standards than we currently enjoy.

It's immoral.

The Social Security Trust Fund May Be Worth Less Than Zero

 

[boedicca]

It's more than just "placing the blame". It's about competing ideologies.

One ideology wants growth and education and research and job creation and new technology.

The other ideology wants tax cuts for the wealthy, and spending - but only on the military, and to slash funding for, not only education, but also slash funding for: rebuilding the infrastructure, researching new technology, destroying unions and removing regulations for clean air and clean water so corporations can squeeze every cent they can out of the country.

This is one of those few cases where there really is two sharply defined ideologies which translates into opposing choices.

You can cut spending all you want, but if the economy isn't growing, it will never be enough.

I mentioned blame, where? Sides, where? Ideologies, where?

The public is not nearly as incapable as some liberals presume or some Republicans hope. Indeed, the past 4 years have taught some lessons that many under 60 never learned about personal behavior and public domains.

Jobs will follow when the federal government does what it's supposed to and gets out of the areas where it has no business. Don't go all apeshit that implies no regulations, it doesn't.

Those vanilla statements with nothing to back them up always amaze me. The single largest contributer to the "world's economy" is a US government program called NASA.

1,400 documented NASA inventions have benefited U.S. industry, improved the quality of life and created jobs for not just Americans, but around the world - Republicans don't even believe in science.

NASA Spinoffs - Inventions Benefiting Our Daily Lives - Apollo Spinoff Inventions

Poppycock. The biggest benefit to the world's economy is our amazing productivity increases in agriculture. A tiny fraction of the U.S. population feeds not only the U.S. but many people in the rest of the world. When people spend less time on subsistence farming and earning "food", their productivity is unleashed to advance other sectors of the economy.

 

[Dot Com]

The right wing is missing the point. You can cut all you want, but if the economy isn't growing, and it won't as long as the entire nation's wealth is concentrated in the hands of just 1%, the cuts will never be enough. The economy has to grow.

Cutting support for education is simply carving away at the nation's future. Growing corn and cotton won't be enough.

Agreed. Austerity alone isn't the answer especially the type that further punishes the poor (the conservatives favorite target, reaping minimal gains as a % of the debt) Why is it that when there's an economic downturn, the Repubs go after the lower classes and leave the upper- middle classes and upper- classes out of the solution when their *cough* 'investments' invariably led to the down-turn in the first place? If Cantor REALLY wanted to look at austerity measures, he could have addressed increasing the retirement age for SS and increasing out-of-pocket-expenses for Medicare as Rand Paul proposed during his campaign.

I believe there is more to it than going after SS and Medicare. First, if they want roll back a program, the Republicans should be rolling back their "drugs for votes" bill passed under Bush through RECONCILIATION that some estimates say will cost 5 to 7 trillion dollars.

Second, the first law Republicans should change is the one keeping states and HMOs from purchasing "bulk" medicine. Other countries will consolidate their drug requirements and purchase in bulk which drives down the cost. Republicans made sure this can't happen here. Every HMO can only purchase for that HMO.

Republicans have made sure everything in this country is slanted towards business making lots and lots of money.

As far as SS, do right wingers really want to see 70 old police or firemen or medics? Here in Illinois, there are more than 700 police between 60 and 65 (I previously published that link after being challenged by a right winger). So we want them to be between 65 and 70?

What about people who never paid into SS who get it? I'm not talking widows or kids of those who paid in, but those who gamed the system.

What about people who have 5 million dollars or more? What is a few hundred a month to them?

People paid into SS their entire working lives. What about them?

And what about our military? If Republicans weren't so hellbent on tying us to foreign oil (why is that?), we have the technology to create all the energy we need. Screw the middle east. Unfortunately, they screw us.

There are sharp differences between the two parties. Very sharp.

I'm all for means testing. I think Cheney, w/ his $350,000,000 can survive w/o another couple o' hundred bucks to his swiss acct.

BTW- $5 million used to be a lot of money in the 80's but since Reagan's deregulation and Phil Grahamm's (R) (we're a country of whiner's) introduced the bill to eviscerate The Glass-Steagall Act the rich have gotten exponentionally richer.
Glass

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act was introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999.

 

[rdean]

Agreed. Austerity alone isn't the answer especially the type that further punishes the poor (the conservatives favorite target, reaping minimal gains as a % of the debt) Why is it that when there's an economic downturn, the Repubs go after the lower classes and leave the upper- middle classes and upper- classes out of the solution when their *cough* 'investments' invariably led to the down-turn in the first place? If Cantor REALLY wanted to look at austerity measures, he could have addressed increasing the retirement age for SS and increasing out-of-pocket-expenses for Medicare as Rand Paul proposed during his campaign.

I believe there is more to it than going after SS and Medicare. First, if they want roll back a program, the Republicans should be rolling back their "drugs for votes" bill passed under Bush through RECONCILIATION that some estimates say will cost 5 to 7 trillion dollars.

Second, the first law Republicans should change is the one keeping states and HMOs from purchasing "bulk" medicine. Other countries will consolidate their drug requirements and purchase in bulk which drives down the cost. Republicans made sure this can't happen here. Every HMO can only purchase for that HMO.

Republicans have made sure everything in this country is slanted towards business making lots and lots of money.

As far as SS, do right wingers really want to see 70 old police or firemen or medics? Here in Illinois, there are more than 700 police between 60 and 65 (I previously published that link after being challenged by a right winger). So we want them to be between 65 and 70?

What about people who never paid into SS who get it? I'm not talking widows or kids of those who paid in, but those who gamed the system.

What about people who have 5 million dollars or more? What is a few hundred a month to them?

People paid into SS their entire working lives. What about them?

And what about our military? If Republicans weren't so hellbent on tying us to foreign oil (why is that?), we have the technology to create all the energy we need. Screw the middle east. Unfortunately, they screw us.

There are sharp differences between the two parties. Very sharp.

There are stark realities to SS. Less people are paying in than there were in the beginning. Changes will have to be made but Cantor & co. don't want to go there for obvious reasons. Those two programs, SS & Medicare, are the lions share of government spending, which, if modified, can reap huge savings. The President already instructed the Sec of Defense to cut out 10% of the fat at the Pentagon which he has done so, you can't go there although I'm sure there's more savings to be had as alot of the stuff are pet projects in Congressmen's districts to garner votes at the expense of the tax- payers $.

So what you do is start with programs that make an immediate impact. Number one would be to allow states and HMOs to purchase drugs in bulk.

There is a Pakistani engineer where I work who needs costly drugs for his father. He buys them from Pakistan through the mail for pennies. Why? Because Pakistan, as a country, buys drugs from America in bulk, something Republicans made sure can't happen here. Pakistan buys those drugs here.

So maybe you'd think that Medicare -- representing all the nation's seniors -- would use its mammoth buying power to get even bigger drug discounts for them. But you'd be wrong. The new Medicare drug bill prohibits Medicare from negotiating deals with drug companies. The pharmaceutical industry used its clout with the Republicans in Congress who designed the bill to prevent such bargaining.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=buying_drugs_in_bulk

THAT'S THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. WHAT THEIR BASE SUPPORTS.

 

[Dot Com]

So what you do is start with programs that make an immediate impact. Number one would be to allow states and HMOs to purchase drugs in bulk.

There is a Pakistani engineer where I work who needs costly drugs for his father. He buys them from Pakistan through the mail for pennies. Why? Because Pakistan, as a country, buys drugs from America in bulk, something Republicans made sure can't happen here. Pakistan buys those drugs here.

So maybe you'd think that Medicare -- representing all the nation's seniors -- would use its mammoth buying power to get even bigger drug discounts for them. But you'd be wrong. The new Medicare drug bill prohibits Medicare from negotiating deals with drug companies. The pharmaceutical industry used its clout with the Republicans in Congress who designed the bill to prevent such bargaining.

Buying Drugs in Bulk

THAT'S THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. WHAT THEIR BASE SUPPORTS.

That's a good start but yes, Republicans are in Big Pharma's pockets apparently.

 

[Annie]

It's more than just "placing the blame". It's about competing ideologies.

One ideology wants growth and education and research and job creation and new technology.

The other ideology wants tax cuts for the wealthy, and spending - but only on the military, and to slash funding for, not only education, but also slash funding for: rebuilding the infrastructure, researching new technology, destroying unions and removing regulations for clean air and clean water so corporations can squeeze every cent they can out of the country.

This is one of those few cases where there really is two sharply defined ideologies which translates into opposing choices.

You can cut spending all you want, but if the economy isn't growing, it will never be enough.

I mentioned blame, where? Sides, where? Ideologies, where?

The public is not nearly as incapable as some liberals presume or some Republicans hope. Indeed, the past 4 years have taught some lessons that many under 60 never learned about personal behavior and public domains.

Jobs will follow when the federal government does what it's supposed to and gets out of the areas where it has no business. Don't go all apeshit that implies no regulations, it doesn't.

Those vanilla statements with nothing to back them up always amaze me. The single largest contributer to the "world's economy" is a US government program called NASA.

1,400 documented NASA inventions have benefited U.S. industry, improved the quality of life and created jobs for not just Americans, but around the world - Republicans don't even believe in science.

NASA Spinoffs - Inventions Benefiting Our Daily Lives - Apollo Spinoff Inventions

Good for development. DOD has created even more, that doesn't have anything to do with what was posted. There are areas for the Federal government, areas for the states, more than either in sheer volume for the local governments. The Fed has usurped too many powers and dominions. Balance those out, the deficits would be righted or at least moving in that direction.

 

[rdean]

I mentioned blame, where? Sides, where? Ideologies, where?

The public is not nearly as incapable as some liberals presume or some Republicans hope. Indeed, the past 4 years have taught some lessons that many under 60 never learned about personal behavior and public domains.

Jobs will follow when the federal government does what it's supposed to and gets out of the areas where it has no business. Don't go all apeshit that implies no regulations, it doesn't.

Those vanilla statements with nothing to back them up always amaze me. The single largest contributer to the "world's economy" is a US government program called NASA.

1,400 documented NASA inventions have benefited U.S. industry, improved the quality of life and created jobs for not just Americans, but around the world - Republicans don't even believe in science.

NASA Spinoffs - Inventions Benefiting Our Daily Lives - Apollo Spinoff Inventions

Poppycock. The biggest benefit to the world's economy is our amazing productivity increases in agriculture. A tiny fraction of the U.S. population feeds not only the U.S. but many people in the rest of the world. When people spend less time on subsistence farming and earning "food", their productivity is unleashed to advance other sectors of the economy.

Do some research and you will find NASA has contributed to agriculture. In fact, it's because of science that food crops are more resistant to pests, use less water and are more nutritious.

NASA Satellites Help Global Agriculture - Space News - redOrbit

http://www.ag.iastate.edu/centers/ftcsc/media/challenge.pdf

HowStuffWorks "NASA Space Food Research Lab: Lots More Information"

Farming has become a science:

A NAC Gene Regulating Senescence Improves Grain Protein, Zinc, and Iron Content in Wheat

But of course, to the right wing, it's all "Poppycock". This is why education is so important.

 

[rdean]

I mentioned blame, where? Sides, where? Ideologies, where?

The public is not nearly as incapable as some liberals presume or some Republicans hope. Indeed, the past 4 years have taught some lessons that many under 60 never learned about personal behavior and public domains.

Jobs will follow when the federal government does what it's supposed to and gets out of the areas where it has no business. Don't go all apeshit that implies no regulations, it doesn't.

Those vanilla statements with nothing to back them up always amaze me. The single largest contributer to the "world's economy" is a US government program called NASA.

1,400 documented NASA inventions have benefited U.S. industry, improved the quality of life and created jobs for not just Americans, but around the world - Republicans don't even believe in science.

NASA Spinoffs - Inventions Benefiting Our Daily Lives - Apollo Spinoff Inventions

Good for development. DOD has created even more, that doesn't have anything to do with what was posted. There are areas for the Federal government, areas for the states, more than either in sheer volume for the local governments. The Fed has usurped too many powers and dominions. Balance those out, the deficits would be righted or at least moving in that direction.

Like what?

 

[Annie]

Those vanilla statements with nothing to back them up always amaze me. The single largest contributer to the "world's economy" is a US government program called NASA.

1,400 documented NASA inventions have benefited U.S. industry, improved the quality of life and created jobs for not just Americans, but around the world - Republicans don't even believe in science.

NASA Spinoffs - Inventions Benefiting Our Daily Lives - Apollo Spinoff Inventions

Good for development. DOD has created even more, that doesn't have anything to do with what was posted. There are areas for the Federal government, areas for the states, more than either in sheer volume for the local governments. The Fed has usurped too many powers and dominions. Balance those out, the deficits would be righted or at least moving in that direction.

Like what?

Looks at your lists of proposed areas of cuts, look at my first response.

 

[rdean]

So what you do is start with programs that make an immediate impact. Number one would be to allow states and HMOs to purchase drugs in bulk.

There is a Pakistani engineer where I work who needs costly drugs for his father. He buys them from Pakistan through the mail for pennies. Why? Because Pakistan, as a country, buys drugs from America in bulk, something Republicans made sure can't happen here. Pakistan buys those drugs here.

So maybe you'd think that Medicare -- representing all the nation's seniors -- would use its mammoth buying power to get even bigger drug discounts for them. But you'd be wrong. The new Medicare drug bill prohibits Medicare from negotiating deals with drug companies. The pharmaceutical industry used its clout with the Republicans in Congress who designed the bill to prevent such bargaining.

Buying Drugs in Bulk

THAT'S THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. THAT'S WHAT THEY DO. WHAT THEIR BASE SUPPORTS.

That's a good start but yes, Republicans are in Big Pharma's pockets apparently.

The money saved nationwide could be in the trillions. At the very least, it would raise the cost of drugs to foreign countries while reducing the cost here. Right now, we are basically subsidizing the drug cost for the rest of the world. And we have the Republicans to thank. Their base doesn't hold their leadership responsible to any type of standard. In fact, I suspect many of the base supports squeezing as much money out of the country as possible so they can call it, "Capitalism". Anything good for America, they call "Socialism".

 

[Dot Com]

It's more than just "placing the blame". It's about competing ideologies.

One ideology wants growth and education and research and job creation and new technology.

The other ideology wants tax cuts for the wealthy, and spending - but only on the military, and to slash funding for, not only education, but also slash funding for: rebuilding the infrastructure, researching new technology, destroying unions and removing regulations for clean air and clean water so corporations can squeeze every cent they can out of the country.

This is one of those few cases where there really is two sharply defined ideologies which translates into opposing choices.

You can cut spending all you want, but if the economy isn't growing, it will never be enough.

I mentioned blame, where? Sides, where? Ideologies, where?

The public is not nearly as incapable as some liberals presume or some Republicans hope. Indeed, the past 4 years have taught some lessons that many under 60 never learned about personal behavior and public domains.

Jobs will follow when the federal government does what it's supposed to and gets out of the areas where it has no business. Don't go all apeshit that implies no regulations, it doesn't.

Those vanilla statements with nothing to back them up always amaze me. The single largest contributer to the "world's economy" is a US government program called NASA.

1,400 documented NASA inventions have benefited U.S. industry, improved the quality of life and created jobs for not just Americans, but around the world - Republicans don't even believe in science.

NASA Spinoffs - Inventions Benefiting Our Daily Lives - Apollo Spinoff Inventions

I notice that she left out the benefits of national laboratories not to mention miltary installations. ALL publicly funded.
United States Department of Energy National Laboratories - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[boedicca]

Those vanilla statements with nothing to back them up always amaze me. The single largest contributer to the "world's economy" is a US government program called NASA.

1,400 documented NASA inventions have benefited U.S. industry, improved the quality of life and created jobs for not just Americans, but around the world - Republicans don't even believe in science.

NASA Spinoffs - Inventions Benefiting Our Daily Lives - Apollo Spinoff Inventions

Poppycock. The biggest benefit to the world's economy is our amazing productivity increases in agriculture. A tiny fraction of the U.S. population feeds not only the U.S. but many people in the rest of the world. When people spend less time on subsistence farming and earning "food", their productivity is unleashed to advance other sectors of the economy.

Do some research and you will find NASA has contributed to agriculture. In fact, it's because of science that food crops are more resistant to pests, use less water and are more nutritious.

NASA Satellites Help Global Agriculture - Space News - redOrbit

http://www.ag.iastate.edu/centers/ftcsc/media/challenge.pdf

HowStuffWorks "NASA Space Food Research Lab: Lots More Information"

Farming has become a science:

A NAC Gene Regulating Senescence Improves Grain Protein, Zinc, and Iron Content in Wheat

But of course, to the right wing, it's all "Poppycock". This is why education is so important.

There's a huge problem with your promotion of NASA as the source of all innovation: it's not true.

The innovation was performed by PRIVATE SECTOR ENTITES that did the projects. You are also forgetting the concept of "what could have been done" if the government hadn't sucked so much money out of the economy for these projects. The government is not an efficient investor of "capital" - the private sector does much more with far less.

 

[rdean]

Good for development. DOD has created even more, that doesn't have anything to do with what was posted. There are areas for the Federal government, areas for the states, more than either in sheer volume for the local governments. The Fed has usurped too many powers and dominions. Balance those out, the deficits would be righted or at least moving in that direction.

Like what?

Looks at your lists of proposed areas of cuts, look at my first response.

So I went back and looked. Shifting responsibility to those less able to handle it seems like a poor plan.

To me, that seems like a system of "every man for himself".

Republicans have gotten so caught up with this, "It's Socialism", that they seem to be willing to let the country just "die".

Considering that for every dollar most Blue states pay to the fed, they get LESS than a dollar back and for every dollar most Red states pay to the fed, they get MORE than a dollar back, I'm all it. But Republicans would suffer massively. What that shows is how little they actually contribute to the country. I know bringing that up sends them into hysterics, but it's the truth. How else can reality be explained?

 

[rdean]

Poppycock. The biggest benefit to the world's economy is our amazing productivity increases in agriculture. A tiny fraction of the U.S. population feeds not only the U.S. but many people in the rest of the world. When people spend less time on subsistence farming and earning "food", their productivity is unleashed to advance other sectors of the economy.

Do some research and you will find NASA has contributed to agriculture. In fact, it's because of science that food crops are more resistant to pests, use less water and are more nutritious.

NASA Satellites Help Global Agriculture - Space News - redOrbit

http://www.ag.iastate.edu/centers/ftcsc/media/challenge.pdf

HowStuffWorks "NASA Space Food Research Lab: Lots More Information"

Farming has become a science:

A NAC Gene Regulating Senescence Improves Grain Protein, Zinc, and Iron Content in Wheat

But of course, to the right wing, it's all "Poppycock". This is why education is so important.

There's a huge problem with your promotion of NASA as the source of all innovation: it's not true.

The innovation was performed by PRIVATE SECTOR ENTITES that did the projects. You are also forgetting the concept of "what could have been done" if the government hadn't sucked so much money out of the economy for these projects. The government is not an efficient investor of "capital" - the private sector does much more with far less.

There's a huge problem with your promotion of NASA as the source of all innovation: it's not true.

I know it's not. That's why I never said it. In fact, until you, I never heard anyone say that. So where did that quote come from?

 

[Annie]

Like what?

Looks at your lists of proposed areas of cuts, look at my first response.

So I went back and looked. Shifting responsibility to those less able to handle it seems like a poor plan.

To me, that seems like a system of "every man for himself".

Republicans have gotten so caught up with this, "It's Socialism", that they seem to be willing to let the country just "die".

Considering that for every dollar most Blue states pay to the fed, they get LESS than a dollar back and for every dollar most Red states pay to the fed, they get MORE than a dollar back, I'm all it. But Republicans would suffer massively. What that shows is how little they actually contribute to the country. I know bringing that up sends them into hysterics, but it's the truth. How else can reality be explained?

Luckily you are only one of the citizens.

 

[Wry Catcher]

After more than a trillion dollars in government stimulus having had a minimal effect, rdean STILL thinks government is the answer.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provided jobs, fewer people lost their homes and stimulated their local economies.

Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money

Most of the projects will provide long term benefits. Rebuilding an infrastructure ignored by advocates of 'conservative principals' was and remains a stupid idea motivated by selfish greed and callous disregard for future generations.
If PC had her way, Golden Gate Park, Central Park and open space in the cities between SF and NY wouldn't exist, instead soviet style tenaments would be there providing housing for the 'middle class', non-unionized labor supporting by there labor both the poorest of the poor and the richest of the rich.

 

[boedicca]

Do some research and you will find NASA has contributed to agriculture. In fact, it's because of science that food crops are more resistant to pests, use less water and are more nutritious.

NASA Satellites Help Global Agriculture - Space News - redOrbit

http://www.ag.iastate.edu/centers/ftcsc/media/challenge.pdf

HowStuffWorks "NASA Space Food Research Lab: Lots More Information"

Farming has become a science:

A NAC Gene Regulating Senescence Improves Grain Protein, Zinc, and Iron Content in Wheat

But of course, to the right wing, it's all "Poppycock". This is why education is so important.

There's a huge problem with your promotion of NASA as the source of all innovation: it's not true.

The innovation was performed by PRIVATE SECTOR ENTITES that did the projects. You are also forgetting the concept of "what could have been done" if the government hadn't sucked so much money out of the economy for these projects. The government is not an efficient investor of "capital" - the private sector does much more with far less.

There's a huge problem with your promotion of NASA as the source of all innovation: it's not true.

I know it's not. That's why I never said it. In fact, until you, I never heard anyone say that. So where did that quote come from?

You claimed it was the biggest contributor to the world economy, bub.

That is complete and utter nonsense.

 

[boedicca]

After more than a trillion dollars in government stimulus having had a minimal effect, rdean STILL thinks government is the answer.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provided jobs, fewer people lost their homes and stimulated their local economies.

Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money

Most of the projects will provide long term benefits. Rebuilding an infrastructure ignored by advocates of 'conservative principals' was and remains a stupid idea motivated by selfish greed and callous disregard for future generations.
If PC had her way, Golden Gate Park, Central Park and open space in the cities between SF and NY wouldn't exist, instead soviet style tenaments would be there providing housing for the 'middle class', non-unionized labor supporting by there labor both the poorest of the poor and the richest of the rich.

AHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Recovery.gov is an Obama Propaganda site. They are just making up crap.