Why I threw up a little in my mouth while watching the speech.
Bog and JuJu help me in this dark hour of insanity...…
"A sinister cabal of superior writers."
State of the Union: Fear and Loathing - Comments Page 2
Why I threw up a little in my mouth while watching the speech.
Bog and JuJu help me in this dark hour of insanity...…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - Mark Saleski
so, seriously, what about those numbers i found? and why the big gap between them and what dave found?
27 - Dave Nalle
Mark, my data was from the BEA, not the BLS. My original number which was substantially higher than the CPI was a figure for total income, not just wages. Investment income and non-salary benefits have been strong in the last year. My figures were also not broken down by job type the way yours are. The percentage you quote is only for administrative/management jobs, not employment as a whole.
Dave
28 - gonzo marx
comment #27 sez...
*Investment income and non-salary benefits have been strong in the last year.*
and if you look at the Article Mark linked to, you will see this
and there you have the dichotomy folks
you add "investment income" and you skew the numbers
we are talking about the WAGES of folks who are Working...
not that Investing et al is not important, but it has NOTHING to do with workers wages
and THAT is how you skew math to make shit look rosy
Excelsior!
29 - Dave Nalle
comment #23 sez...
*According to the Maine Dept of Labor you work in the second highest paid industry in the state with an average salary of right around $47,000 a year.*
well..there's a lie right there...off by about 25%
I'm sorry, you're saying that the Maine Department of Labor is lying about salaries in the state? Come again? From what I can tell this data is just gathered from employers. I can't see any reason to doubt its accuracy.
and all the techs here earn the same salary...in our industry as well as things like TV repair, there is a HUGE split between what is charged for the labor, by the hour...and what is paid to the tech
Which has no impact on the figures I quoted, which are for salary not the amount spent by employers on salaries.
not many techs at my level in all of maine, i can honestly say i personally know most of them outside of Portland...
the only ones makin ghte kind of money you are talking about, own their business
The figures from the Maine Dept. of Labor or the BLS or the BEA are necessarily broader than your specific area of expertise.
i was just showing the difference, and how that can change a Viewpoint...
Viewpoint is the problem with your whole approach here. You can't extrapolate from your personal experience or your highly specialized tech job to all the tech jobs or all the workers in all the areas of employment in your state or in the nation as a whole. Your experience and my experience are completely irrelevant. We may have completely aberrant personal circumstances which go against all the trends. You have to go with what's in the government and industry surveys if you want to talk in general terms about anyone other than yourself and the people you know personally.
Dave
30 - gonzo marx
no...the problem is tha YOU don't take into account all the pertinent Variables..
for the sake of our example here
those Maine stats include the VASt majority of tech types that live in York county (south of Portland) yet who WORK in NH or Mass..where wages are MUCH higher
since they live in Maine, they pay their taxes here, and skew the Equation in a huge manner
now., someone here knows that ...those that just look at charts...no matter how bright, does not
this is EXACTLY the type of thing i am trying to discuss here...the sry numbers can be played with in many ways, but do not neccesarily represent the Actuality
they do great for Indications, but not completely for description
Excelsior!
31 - Mark Saleski
hmmm, well all i know is that if you look out there, an awful lot of publications are using the numbers in the 3.2 range.
32 - Dave Nalle
Gonzo, I never represented my figures as anything other than personal income. However, the same tables provide figures for wages without benefits or other sources of income. And as I pointed out, wages and salaries taken by themselves on a nationwide basis were up by 6% in 2005.
I think I know what part of the discrepancy is, though. The BEA figures are for the overall increase in wages, not for the increase in individual wages, so they need to be adjusted by the number of new people entering the work force. But the work force only expanded by about 1.1% in 20005, so that's not going to knock the individual wages down as low as Mark's figure.
The other factor is that Mark is quoting a figure for just one particular type of job and it's about the bottom of the barrel as far as growth according to that same BusinessWeek source, which shows other tech jobs growing at rates double or even triple the management jobs.
Dave
33 - Shark
Nalle, you look tres fab in that short little skirt, that tight sweater, and carring those red-white & blue pom-poms!
Come sit on Shark's lap and say, "Ready... OKAY!"
PS: Gonzo - Anyone who isn't afraid just ain't payin' attention.
PPS: luv ya, mean it!
S
PPPS: Hitting the numbers - numbing the hitters = BEST LINE OF 2006 on Blogcritics. Way ta go!
34 - Mark Saleski
well, this release from the bls states that the number is 3.1
who the hell knows, i guess everybody is spinning.
35 - Dave Nalle
Mark, read that relase carefully. That 3.1% number is AFTER adjusting from gross earnings and taking the CPI into consideration. So that works. It's my number minus the CPI which produces that 3.1% number, which is how much of an increase in income people had nationwide after figuring in the increase in expenses.
Dave
36 - Dave Nalle
Oh, and I don't think anyone here is spinning except maybe Shark who's chasing his tail. Gonzo isn't even spinning, he's just obsessed with his personal job situation as a microcosm for the whole world.
Dave
37 - Mark Saleski
it says: "Average weekly earnings rose by 3.1 percent, seasonally adjusted, from December 2004 to December 2005. After deflation by the CPI-W, average weekly earnings decreased by 0.4 percent."
sorry, but that's not what you're saying.
38 - Dave Nalle
Hmm I misread it then. That being the case I have no idea why the BEA and BLS figures are so radically different. The BEA does have a figure for what they call 'real disposable personal income', which is after adjusting for personal expenses, inflation and the like, and that increased by 1.4% in 2005. Maybe if you then adjust that for the 1.1% increase in the total number of workers you might get close to the BLS final figure, though it looks to me like you still end up with individual disposble income growth of more than 1%. And BTW, 2005 was a bad year in this area. 2004 was much stronger in the BEA figures.
Dave
39 - gonzo marx
obsessed?
ummm...nope
nice try at dismissal tho...and here i had thought we were making progress...
i was using my personal info as a mere example that i coudl speak knowledgably about
as opposed to from behind the gates of a personal compound...
see?...anyone can snark
deal with the Issues
Excelsior!
40 - Al Barger
Brother Gonzo, I'm glad to see you at least concretizing your thoughts into an actual essay. It's nice to get some entertaining gonzo schtick a goin', but there's no there there. Simply that you're ranting on about the apocalypse being upon us doesn't mean that it is.
"more bullshit from the NeoCon Agenda as to why we are working on Empire America" We can't run a country based on dumb statements like this. It's not an argument, but mere cursing. It takes more than curses and cheap labels like "NeoCon Agenda" to run a country.
You're not making any real arguments at all. At best, a couple of places here you've strung together a few abstract words that are supposed to SOUND like they mean something, but really don't at all. Stuff like, "accelerating the selling out of America via their Corporate and Lobbyist Masters , bit by bit...for Chinese and Indian money to line CEO's pockets while tossing aside American Workers" You might as well be puppet Tim Robbins in Team America carrying on about the big corporations acting "all corporation-y."
About the most thing of substance is that you're legitimately pointing out the ridiculous lack of fiduciary responsibility by the Republicans. Fair enough.
But mostly this is just silly shit, like "Liberty: Born July 4th, 1776 - Died January 31st 2006." Riiight. Totally baseless hysterics like this are unbecoming a woman, but REALLY looks foolish coming from a grown man. Seriously, if my teenaged niece came talking this squirrelly, she'd be asking for correction by ridicule. Do you think this is any kind of manly?
I don't have any strong opinion about Alito one way or another, but there's certainly absolutely NOTHING in his record to be the basis of such a statement, other than that he was appointed by George Bush. OH MY GOD! BUSH HAS APPOINTED A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE! IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD! OH MOMMY, COME SAVE ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Two points for succintness to the dreaded Dave Nalle for "trade deficit: A nonexistent fictional construct" That breaks it down perfectly.
These trade deficit numbers are right nigh meaningless. For starters, "we" do not trade with "them." I trade with Wal Mart which buys from a supplier in Missouri who imports some of their parts from a company in China that buys stuff from India to turn into stuff that they sell in Italy.
There are times when an US vs them frame is necessary and appropriate, such as when some self-defined "they" are trying to directly come kill US because we are US. But trade issues like this are a perfect example of the kind of situation where the US vs them mentality is just not really logically applicable, and can only be highly detrimental to our interests.
Key point about trade deficits: We spend more money with other countries because we continually CREATE and GENERATE more wealth. All this trade deficit nonsense is built on the false premise of a zero sum game. We spend more money because we MAKE more money in the first place.
41 - Dave Nalle
Tying in my recent reading at the BEA with what Al brought back up about the trade deficit, I noticed that manufacturing jobs have dropped to less than a 5th of our total economic output. So since they are our main source of exports, it's actually kind of miraculous that our trade deficit isn't even larger than it is. It means that what we DO make we sell overseas very successfully, but as I've said before we're still a consumer driven economy as we have been since the colonial era.
And Gonzo, do you EVER see me extrapolating from my life circumstances to draw general conclusions? Or even using myself as an example? I don't because I know I'm not normal. Maybe you ought to come to grips with the fact that you aren't the 'typical' American worker either.
Dave
42 - Mark Saleski
Totally baseless hysterics like this are unbecoming a woman, but REALLY looks foolish coming from a grown man.
brilliant.
just brilliant.
43 - gonzo marx
comment #41 sez...
*And Gonzo, do you EVER see me extrapolating from my life circumstances to draw general conclusions? Or even using myself as an example? I don't because I know I'm not normal.*
Quoted for Truth...
and point taken...i am fairly certain you will have noticed that up until this Article..i had not done so either...rather careful about that
here, as i stated above, i was utilizing such examples to make a Point...that real world conditions are not always accurately represented in sanitized charts and numbers
i think i have made that Point decently enough...and yours is taken, where it concerns exposing my own info...unless of course i feel like it
but i'm silly like that
big Al...i ain't forgotten you ...am just at work, and your detailed Comment deserves a good Response, which will be forthcoming, after i get off from work...
meanwhile...it seems ya missed... this
two essays in a week....can the World handle the strain?...i know yer dilithium "crystals" probably can't
but i digress...
Excelsior!
44 - Margaret Romao Toigo
That "privacy shyte" has a lot of people concerned, which could partly explain why the primary focus of this thread has been economics when, if you look at the beast as a whole, our economy is generally stable.
I'm one of those annoying optimists and, as such, I have faith in my fellow Americans' ability to see through fear mongering, false dichotomies and other dubious rhetoric of politicians who keep their own best interests in mind.
The signs of this "awakening" -- or whatever you may wish to call it -- have become increasingly apparent since the Terry Schiavo misadventure in which the alleged conservativism of the American people was grossly overestimated and lead to political embarrassment for those who thought they were so "in touch" with mainstream Americans.
One badly-handled hurricane aftermath later, our press began to shake off its post-9/11 timidity and started asking real questions again, which was a Good Thing because there are now plenty of real questions to ask about the "Culture of Corruption" that seems to have permeated our government.
And let's not forget that still-brewing FISA-warrantless NSA domestic spying scandal. That one's not going to go away, no matter how much sanctimonious posturing is applied in speeches and spin.
November is still a long way off, but consider that all of Congress and one-third of the Senate are up for re-election and some Republican incumbents are already getting nervous and attempting to distance themselves from the administration. Some of them are even starting to feel the heat from Democratic contenders for their seats.
If this trend continues, we are likely going to see a Democratic majority elected to the Congress and if that happens...
45 - gonzo marx
ok..home now, time fer big Al!
Al sez...
*We spend more money with other countries because we continually CREATE and GENERATE more wealth. All this trade deficit nonsense is built on the false premise of a zero sum game.*
well Al..let me put it to you, that even in a fiat economy(where there is no base standard,the government just prints what they want) that UNLESS the government just starts printing paper and allowing Inflation to run rampant, that it IS a "zero-sum game"
this mean, that for every dollar made, someone had to spend it
can we agree there?
now, my Concern...which i imply, but don't come right out and say in my Post...is that i agree with Mr Nalle...we ARE a consumer driven Economy, and my worry is that with the middle class stagnating at best, shrinking at worst, there will be LESS spending as soon as folks hit their credit limit and can't borrow any more cash
what happens to the economy then?
don't think that can happen? ask around, check the numbers on just how much Debt americans are carrying and compare that to the less than 1% that they are saving
yer a bright guy Al..do the math
the same holds for our Government...for the last 5 years, we have been maxxing our nation's "credit cards"...and throwing the cash around for pork at the same time we have cut taxes(not a bad thing in itself) which shrinks the incoming revenue flow
how long can that go on? for as long as foreign countries continue to buy the Debt, which is avbout 10 minutes longer than we continue to pay out the HUGE Interest on said Debt
there's that one...
i can see form your take on it, that no amount of discussion is going to convince you that deficits in trade are bad...i will instead point to the shit i just typed and say.."figger it out yerself"
as for my "silly shit"..well yes, Al..it IS silly, deliberately so...
i am NOT any kind of "journalist"...instead i like to use the wrist rocket of Wit to fire an acorn of Truth at yer Funnybone in the hopes that it will sink into the fertile soil of yer Mind and sprout the blooming Flower of new Thought....
anyone who just got a Pythonesque visual of big Al's head sprouting a petunia treat yerself to a cookie...
the NeoCon Agenda...you are SO quick to toss it aside, that i guess you have either
a)gone over to the Dark Side
or
b) remain woefully unInformed about it...
but i digress...
try this for the wikipedia description
or this linkage for their very own website, scope the "statement of principles" carefully...then scroll down and see who signed off on it in '97
scared yet?
what is brought out here is that these folks...who include Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle and Scooter Libby...want to expand American influence via military operations (among other tactics)...and there are bits written among the site that pray for "a new Pearl Harbor" to spur the Nation into that course of action
from my reckoning, almost HALF of the State of the Union speech dealt with EXACTLY that set of proposals
an dthat is why, instead of staying in Afghanistan and capturing bin Laden, our Resources and military were shifted to the "soft target" of Iraq, which they thought woudl be a cakewalk to take (it was) and simple to hold and build bases for further expansion (nothing turned out to be further from the Fact there)
now..not only does all THAT bother the shit out of me, but it leads me to the last bit...
Alito and SCOTUS...check Alito's writings and you will find he is a firm advocate for Executive Power ..THIS is a MAJOR concern when you remember the nasty bits from the Pres about the "wiretapping" business...and how the Pres doesn't think he has to submit to either Judicial Review (the FISA court and Laws) or Congressional Oversight
so when i say "Emperor Shrub" i'm only half joking
notice i put that shit under "Fear" ..implying that it MAY be a concern down the road...rather than the "Loathing" stuff which is shit that has already been pulled, or is currently in the works
Margaret in #44 covers a lot of this MUCH better than i ever could...and Bog knows the last thing i want to do is go and deconstruct my Post line by line to hold yer hand and spoon feed it to you
if you got a moments Entertainment out of my Post...then i am way happy...if it made you Think...even for a second...
then i count it a win
nuff said?
Excelsior!
46 - gonzo marx
dreck and feh...
news today...after all that the Shrub talked about concerning healthcare and education...he turned around and signed a Bill today that CUTS student loans and Medicare/Medicaid...
check yer favorite news source...
but i would suggest you do so on an empty stomache
Excelsior!
47 - Dave Nalle
This isn't news, Gonzo. It was part of the budget deal and one of the ways that he's trying to reduce the deficit. It passed congress like 2 weeks ago.
And BTW, the cuts in student loans are tiny and the cuts in healthcare are meaningless since in the next session they're likely going to totally redo Medicaire/Medicaid yet again.
Dave
48 - gonzo marx
for comment #47
you call this shit meaningless...and i call it hypocrisy and lies
it just goes to show the Administration, like most politicians from EITHER side, can't be trusted about anything that comes out of their mouths
i called it "news" because the Vote was so close, and it's going on now (it's expected that Cheney will need to break the tie, and in Congress it was within a handful of votes)
this goes to show how controversial this kind of shit is
and helps point out the sheer hypocrisy of saying you are trying to help education and healthcare...but you shave a tiny bit off the deficit by cutting it...bad mojo both ways
it don't really cut into the deficit, and it actively hurts students and folks that need the healthcare
fucking brilliant...IMO
Excelsior!
49 - Dave Nalle
for comment #47
you call this shit meaningless...and i call it hypocrisy and lies
It's both, IMO. If you depend on the government for ANYTHING you're a fool and get what you deserve.
and helps point out the sheer hypocrisy of saying you are trying to help education and healthcare...but you shave a tiny bit off the deficit by cutting it...bad mojo both ways
it don't really cut into the deficit, and it actively hurts students and folks that need the healthcare
The student loan programs are largely responsible for the rise in tuitions at all kinds of universities. We might be better off if they were cut back radically. As for the healthcare - see above. Anyone who depends on government to take care of needs like that is fucked from the get-go and if this helps drive that home to a few more of them, then that's good.
Dave
50 - gonzo marx
so we can wipe out all the corporate welfare and "tax incentives" too?
i could go for that
Excelsior!
51 - Elvira Black
"As for the healthcare - see above. Anyone who depends on government to take care of needs like that is fucked from the get-go and if this helps drive that home to a few more of them, then that's good."
Double oy vey.
52 - Dave Nalle
You already know my position on that, Gonzo. Corporate welfare such as it is should be eliminated - much of it already has been, but it should all go. As for tax incentives, I'm divided.
I don't like them, but I think they really may be the only way to achieve some necessary objectives. When the choice is between offering a tax break and trying to regulatorily impose behavior on a company I tend to come down on the side of using the financial incentive.
The current issue of alternative fuels is a good example. I don't think it will work to tell Shell or Chevron to just sell ethanol and biodiesel or we'll fine you. But giving them some sort of a tax break or other government incentive might do the job. On the other hand, something really draconian like limiting the number of stations they could operate in a given area without carrying alternative fuels might also do the job.
Dave
53 - Al Barger
El Gonzo Marximus, your comment 45 looks to me like somewhat more significantly serious argument. When you start parsing it out a little more like that, it's much easier to actually make some sense of.
Now you're pretty much right that you're very unlikely to convince me that these fictional aggregate trade deficits are a bad thing. You're just looking at the paper, not what it represents. All the creation of wealth day after day, making better products streamlining and making businesses more efficient- the paper is just markers for keeping track of that, and they can trade around and around and sideways and backwards. But the bottom line is that we are generating more wealth than other countries- not just printing up more paper symbols. That's what's important.
However, I'm perfectly willing to MORE than go along with you about the evils and dangers of government budget deficits. THAT is reality. THIS institution is taking in X dollars, and spending 2X. And government does not create wealth, so it's not an "investment" when we give them money- it's just flat being spent and it's gone.
That nonsense may well come back to bite us in the ass- and I'm sure you'd agree with me that the damned Republicans are at this historical moment at LEAST as bad as Democrats ever dreamt of.
I too have some concerns about civil liberties issues, and I oppose the Patriot Act. But the sky just isn't falling. It's not fascism or Nazism. It's just somewhat heavyhanded, and potentially dangerous.
As to Alito being deferential to executive power, we'll just have to see how that plays out. To a large extent, I'm for that. There's a point for the SCOTUS to just say no, but it is better under observing the terms of our national charter AND less dangerous to mostly give the elected and accountable executive and legislative branches most of the decision making power.
Specifically, the current wiretapping controversy concerns me somewhat, but it's being blown WAY out of proportion. People getting calls from known Al Qaeda operatives SHOULD be getting listened in on. I just think we need to be more careful about crossing the "T"s and dotting the "I"s. I see no good reason why they can't run stuff by a judge, even a few days after the fact if there's that big a time factor.
Nothing that I'm hearing about the actual practice of this so far is egregious or fascist or any of that, just perhaps a bit arrogant and heavy handed.
As to cutting corporate welfare and tax incentives, I could certainly support that. And you KNOW that I'd be pretty hardcore about what things I'd be willing to axe.
Also, I'm pretty skeptical of tax incentives. That's just more government meddling and presumption to make decisions that are not in their proper authority and that they have not the knowledge to make.
So, to make it fair and simple, let's cut the bejesus out of the federal spending- especially any kind of not absolutely necessary money handed to any kind of business- and eliminate the income tax entirely. That'd be clean, and fair, and get away from arbitrary and counterproductive government manipulation of economic incentives.
54 - gonzo marx
well, now we are makign some headway...sorry if my entertainment ramblings got you all confused...
but it did get ya thinking...
it seems the main point of disagreement is around these privacy Issues...the wiretaps and such
you don't see them as more than some "heavy handedness"...me i spot a dangerous warning sign
the Administration's insistence that they don't have to take things to the Judiciary or submit to congessional oversight makes the Fear rise up like bile in the back of my throat...
coupled with their adding two Justices to SCOTUS, and i think ..."Houston...we have a problem"
could just be me...and JuJu knows i hope i'm wrong
but see the paragraph before the Weatherman quote in the original Post...
nuff said?
Excelsior!
55 - Shark
Barger: "...But the sky just isn't falling. ...It's just somewhat heavyhanded, and potentially dangerous."
Shark flashes on 1933, the German industrialists saying:
"Don't worry; we can control this Hitler character..."
=======
PS: Barger, whenever you want to denigrate someone, you call them a "woman".
Please explain the origins of your lowly opinion of females and/or your misogyny.
Thanks in advance,
S
56 - Shark
NOTE: no need to really, Al, I was being ironic.
(see #33!)
57 - Dave Nalle
Ironic? Is that the code word they're using for 'paranoid' in your group sessions now, Shark?
dave
58 - Matthew T. Sussman
Good for you, Shark. It's so refreshing to see someone not resorting to calling guys you disagree with a woman. Not even in this thread. Not even in comment No. 33. Way to go!
59 - Mark Schannon
Gonzo, sorry to be so late joining the party. Great to see you posting. Your delerious and delicious rants carry more substance than all the arrogant pontification and number crunching of your jealous critics.
While I have much affection for the libertarian cause, I have much more fear, nay, terror about the current administration's abuse of power and total neglect of those truly in need.
Dave--cuts in medicare and medicaid meaningless? Congress may screw up these moronic programs even more, but real people--poor people, whom it's obvious don't belong in your world--are going to be denied drugs coverage. Do you have any idea how much a monthly supply of a low dose of medicine to control high cholesterol is? Try $175. Asthma medicine, low dose: $250.
But, we can argue all day and night about COL vs. rise in wages last year, but over the long term, the lower and middle classes are seeing their buying power head only one direction--towards hell & damnation.
But Sir Gonzo is right, the most terrifying part is that so many Americans are just sitting arounds sniffing their asses while the Bush Bubble Machine tears apart the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Instead of "Give me liberty or give me death," our national slogan seems to be "Give me a new BMW or a Mercedes."
and that's the truth
In Jamesons Veritas
60 - gonzo marx
well now Mark me boyo...
glad t'see ya made it...and even more so that ya had a smile at my bit of silliness
we will see what happens down the road
this summer should be some Fun...between Abramoff and FISA...
i am a bit pissed that the Libby trial was put off till after January...now we see that Obstruction of Justice works for those wanting to obstruct
more's the pity
and woe is U.S.
Excelsior?
61 - Mark Schannon
Woe is right. I don't think Mr. Nalle and company realize the depths to which this country has sunk. The wierd thing is that the very things the neocons are wringing their hands about--loss of values, immorality(not sexual of course), lack of community and civility, the dying American dream--are exactly what we libs are worrying about.
It's just that we cast blame in different directions and find solutions that horrify the other side. Your "maybe" or my "dialectic' could do so much to heal the wounds--but it'll never happen as long as "you know who" lives "you know where."
In Jamesons Veritas
62 - Dave Nalle
Dave--cuts in medicare and medicaid meaningless?
The sentence had TWO clauses. Did you not bother to read the second one? They're meaningless not because I don't care about those on these programs, but because they are obviously going to have to completely redo the legislation from the ground up in the next session.
Congress may screw up these moronic programs even more, but real people--poor people, whom it's obvious don't belong in your world--are going to be denied drugs coverage. Do you have any idea how much a monthly supply of a low dose of medicine to control high cholesterol is? Try $175. Asthma medicine, low dose: $250.
Mark, my daughter is on two asthma medications and TOGETHER they cost less than $200 a month if I buy them at full price. With insurance they're $60 a month.
But, we can argue all day and night about COL vs. rise in wages last year, but over the long term, the lower and middle classes are seeing their buying power head only one direction--towards hell & damnation.
There just isn't any evidence to support this assertion. It's a scaremongering tactic of the left to promote this idea without factual support to do political damage. Pretty reprehensible since it fucks with peoples lives.
Woe is right. I don't think Mr. Nalle and company realize the depths to which this country has sunk. The wierd thing is that the very things the neocons are wringing their hands about--loss of values, immorality(not sexual of course), lack of community and civility, the dying American dream--are exactly what we libs are worrying about.
Well, those things are exactly NOT what I'm worrying about. You can be as moral, as full of values and as civil and community oriented as you like, but if government takes your money at gunpoint for services you don't want or need and forces your children to be dumber with each generation, you're solidly fucked. How about some concern over the immorality of rapacious bureaucracy and property, rights and money grabbing government?
Dave
63 - Bliffle
"It's both, IMO. If you depend on the government for ANYTHING you're a fool and get what you deserve."
Sounds like an excuse for the government to renege it's obligations.
64 - Dave Nalle
No, Bliffle it's an explanation of why we all need to take responsibility for our own lives.
Dave
65 - gonzo marx
so breaking a Promise and reneging on a Promissory Note is ok?
especially AFTER one side HAS lived up to the Obligations outlined in the Social Contract?
bullshit
how about we hold the miserable bastards Accountable?
how about we START by getting rid of ALL the fuckling pork before we cut Benefits to Citizens...
how about legal entities and Lobbyists take a back seat to Citizens?
then, perhaps we will have a good place to start
Excelsior?
66 - Mark Schannon
Dave, I did read both clauses...you just have more faith in Bush & his republican cronies than I. If you think they're going to restore programs to people who truly need them...well, share whatever it is your smoking or drinking--not fair to hog it all.
Adavair is an asthma medicine wrongly prescribed to me by an idiot doctor--it was $250. I'm sure there are other, cheaper medicines. The fact is, for those without medical coverage or lousy coverage (such as moi), and with relatively normal age-related problems such as high blood pressure, reflux, cholesterol, asthma, medication can cost over $1,000/month. And that doesn't account for the newly OTC drugs such as Prilosec. Ain't a lot of folks who can afford that.
As for the long-term economic problems of the lower and middle class, you're right--I should have cited statistics, but I do resent being called "reprehensible." I do not fling around made-up statistics simply for scare mongering, and you, of all people, should know that.
...if government takes your money at gunpoint for services you don't want or need and forces your children to be dumber with each generation, you're solidly fucked. How about some concern over the immorality of rapacious bureaucracy and property, rights and money grabbing government? I'm as concerned about that as you, Dave. You don't own the market on concerns about our over-reaching, quagmired, illogical government.
However, until we've reached the mental, moral, and emotional state that your beloved libertarian utopia requires (and it's one that I happen to think would be pretty cool), we're going to have to have some government, some services we as individuals don't need but society requires, and some intrusion. That's life.
In Jamesons Veritas
67 - Dave Nalle
so breaking a Promise and reneging on a Promissory Note is ok?
Promises are meaningless in the context of politics.
especially AFTER one side HAS lived up to the Obligations outlined in the Social Contract?
Say what? Who are you saying has lived up to their side of the social contract? Certianly not the poor who choose not to vote and choose not to support themselves as productive citizens.
how about we hold the miserable bastards Accountable?
Sure. You just need to figure out WHAT you're going to hold them accountable for. Show me some genuine harm.
how about we START by getting rid of ALL the fuckling pork before we cut Benefits to Citizens...
I'm all for cutting the pork, but these 'benefits' are not an entitlement, they're a handout and they are not necessarily what government should be using its resources for.
how about legal entities and Lobbyists take a back seat to Citizens?
As I've explained to you before, 'legal entities' are made up of citizens. If you disenfranchise them you disenfranchise the citizens they represent within the context of their activities.
Dave
68 - gonzo marx
Mr Nalle sez...
*Promises are meaningless in the context of politics.*
so then...all the Bush promises are meaningless...such as their rpomising to "doeverything" to find bin Laden, their assertation that they are acting properly bypassing FISA...
on and on
well now at least we have some Agreement
Excelsior!
69 - Temple Stark
Girfriend's 3.5 emergency room visit for very sore chest, symptoms of heart attack -$2,500.
No heart attack - until the bill came.
Uninsured as job she's at doesn't offer it.
She makes just enough - about $15,000 to not qualify for medical assistance. She applied twice,
70 - Dave Nalle
I don't mean to be unsympathetic, but the fact that her job doesn't offer insurance doesn't mean that she can't get it on her own. Even with a relatively low income she ought to be able to afford enough insurance to reduce the impact of a major emergency room visit.
As for the bill she faces, there are charities which might help out. You can also try negotiating with the hospital and they will almost certainly be open to working out a payment plan if nothing else.
Dave
71 - gonzo marx
interesting factoid...the types of "coverage" listed in Mr Nalle's piece on this Issue shows that the $2500 falls well under the $5000 dollar deductible
and so on
nice try at the shell game, but if folks wanted to just hand over money they don't have for "services" they will never collect on, they might as well play the lottery
better odds of "winning" there than against the actuarial tables
just a Thought
Excelsior!
72 - andy marsh
2 dodgeball references in one article??? well...maybe one and a half...all those "D's" and not one of them dodge, duck, dive, dip or dodge!
Do you really think Alito is that bad? His first decision was with the liberal side of the court...I don't think we ever really know how these guys are gonna be until they get there.
73 - troll
*too disgusted to go on...the Jeffersonian Option is drawing closer, the next Installment may just be "This, I Believe"...and you, gentle Readers, will note i NEVER use the word "believe" about myself...*
bloggers beware...this one is still on the books and goes to the 'fear' argument:
If two or more persons in any state or territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down or to destroy by force the government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder or delay the execution of any law of the United States or by force to seize, take or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
troll
74 - Christopher Rose
gonzo, how about a holiday?
Concerned of Brixton
75 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Gonzo, I just ran into this piece. Damn, you should have been a poet.
I know I'm only about four months late, but you did a bang up job on George bang bang Bush.
Unfortunately (or fortunately,) I live in what is now a mere backwater turning into scum, waiting for the cleansing Waterfall of Redemption, and looking to change things a bit beforehand on my own.
I know it don't look like it, but we are pretty much on the same side, Gonzo.
Kol hakavód l'khá, yashar kóaH - straight strength, all honor to you!