Comments on: State Budgets: The Day of Reckoning
Add a Comment
- by chevyhotrod December 21, 2010 12:06 PM EST
Then I asked, which party wants more of your money to waste and which ones want less of your money to waste?
The democrats want to spend the money on America - like more teachers in schools, health care for America's citizens, etc - and want to pay for them through taxation, even though we can't afford a lot of what they're proposing.
Meanwhile, the republicans want to want to spend the money on the wealthy so that they can keep the campaign donations rolling in, while spending the money on things that are useless to America - like the multi-billion dollar missile defense shield for Europe, the Iraq War, tax breaks for companies that offshore jobs, etc - and they want to pay for it through borrowing TRILLIONS from China, India, Saudi Arabia, etc.
You can't comprehend that BOTH policies of spend, spend, spend are bad for America. And when I tell all of this to you, all that YOU hear is "starving said that democrats are smart".
Your reading comprehension is non-existent. - Reply to this comment
- Between 375,000 and 475,000 illegal immigrants live and work in Illinois. 641,000 people are unemployed in Illinois.
Argument against kicking out illegals? No one will do their jobs.
Solution? 60-70% of people collection unemployment instantly have the jobs previously held by illegals.
For the remaining 30-40% of the unemployed workforce, the state should mandate 20-30 hours of community service each week. The state would have no trash on the roads, a supply of well-qualified tutors, and many other "unwanted" jobs could be filled by the unemployed. Unemployment gives state/federal money to people, why not make them work for it and improve society at the same time? - Reply to this comment
- The rationale behind the policy of taxing estates isn't to 'stick it' to the rich - it's based on the belief that unearned wealth can more often than not tend to make people less motivated to want to achieve. Which ultimately deprives society of the fruits of that person's labors.
How much is Bill Gates worth - like billions of dollars? And hasn't he said he only plans to leave his kids like $10mil. So his full time job now is to give all his money away.
I mean like I was channel surfing the other day and Sean Hannity was whining that he should be allowed to keep more of his income because he worked hard to earn it. So what's he saying, that soldiers in Iraq who like Bernie Sanders pointed out are getting a Christmas bonus of like $250, they don't work hard? Police and firefighters, teachers, they don't work hard? Shoot, EMT's apparently these days barely make minimum wage because manufacturing's been decimated - they don't work hard?
I think everybody works hard ... - Reply to this comment
- by curse914 December 21, 2010 1:40 AM EST
Have you considered that this is the end of infinite growth capitalism? Growth shifted to the financial sector because growth in all other sectors was gone or have reached a brick wall.
75 percent of all resources extracted from the planet at any given time are consumed by the 1.5 billion privileged. If you think that the remaining 5 billion could consume at that level, you are living in a fantasy.
............................................................................................................................................................................
While points like these are true, they (1) presuppose that the world isn't going to succeed in inventing alternatives, when necessity is the mother of invention, which means that it assumes supplies are finite and static, and (2) given that the comment depends on this moment in time to be meaningful, then why doesn't that theory explain why China is rising as the US falls?
Somebody over at HuffPo made claim with a similar blind spot - that capitalism isn't reason for the US' success. Rather it was because the US didn't have competition post-war. And like while that's true that the US got a huge headstart and never looked back, how do you explain the prosperity of S. Korea in comparison to the North if not for capitalism? How do you explain China's sudden rise in the year 2000 if not for the embracing of capitalism. There's also West Germany before/after the fall of the Berlin wall ...
I do think it's dangerous to get too attached to (or repulsed by) ideology - but I actually used REALITY as my reference point to define the concept, rather than dogma. Something I find disturbing about Pres. Obama's label of 'pragmatism' is that while he's not attached to ideology, he's not at all committed to running his compromise positions through the efficacy lens of REALITY. And he's getting praise? For what? Don't people care about prosperity any more these days? And by 'prosperity' I mean TRUE growth where EVERYBODY shares in the rewards because the economy SUPPLIES things by making and doing the things that are in DEMAND by people.
The money's got to come from somewhere - this class warfare is so stupid because we're all interconnected, so if one group goes down, we all go down with them. Nobody's an island. Try cutting several hundred billion dollars worth of social security and pensions, and see what that does to economic growth. And then see what that does to your stock portfolio. - Reply to this comment
- There was more than a little bit of idiocy in this story. Somehow these states are insolvent and overwhelmed by all of their debts. Hasn't it occurred to anybody that that is what taxes are for?
The tax cutting mania of the last few years has wrecked California and is in the process of wrecking the finances of a lot of states. Low taxes are fine, but in the end, you have to pay for the state services the taxpayers demanded. - Reply to this comment
- by chevyhotrod December 21, 2010 11:26 AM EST
One party wants to take less, one party wants to take more.
Do you know which one wants to take more?
Do you know which one wants to take less?
I know, you are so much smarter than everyone else, because you believe that Democrats spend money so wisely?
It's like a particularly bad joke, being played on a mentally handicapped person.
I contend that BOTH parties waste money, yet you comprehend THOSE WRITTEN WORDS to mean: "starving is saying the democrats are smart".
I just can't explain myself any clearer for to to be able to understand.
I'm sorry.
Maybe you should consider a lawsuit against your public school system, for graduating you without possessing the ability to read or understand written words? (Assuming of course that you actually DID graduate.) - Reply to this comment
- by chevyhotrod December 21, 2010 11:11 AM EST
$22,500 for how many years??? Most can retire very early at full benefits. How much did they pay into the system?
10 years at a cost of $225,000.00 plus healthcare
20 years at a cost of $450,000.00 plus healthcare
30 years at a cost of $675,000.00 plus healthcare
It's funny to hear a conservative complain about the cost of health care, when all they did during the entire health care debate was tell us how the system should be "left alone" because it worked best as it was currently set up. But if a UNIONIZED pensioner has access to health care as part of his CONTRACT, suddenly the health care costs are too high.
And how many retirees do you really think live that long (90 years or older), and collect that much of their pensions?
Contrast that with the number that have paid hundreds of thousands into the retirement system, and died within 10 years of retiring and didn't collect a FRACTION of what they paid into it.
I suppose that you know think that ALL pensioners live to be 100 years old, just to spite you - is that it? - Reply to this comment
- Hmmm where is North Dakota. Oh never mind we have a surplus.
- Reply to this comment
- by chevyhotrod December 21, 2010 11:13 AM EST
I know, you just so much smarter than everyone else. You should be so proud of yourself. Go pat yourself on the back.
My post started off:
"Both parties want to take your money, and spend it in ways that is popular enough to get them elected and re-elected time and time again."
Your response was:
"Keep supporting your beloved Democrats that don't waste money. You continue to support policitians that want to tax more and more money from the American people and you know it.
Yes, I believe is government, small government and if you don't think Democrats do not waste the tax payers money, their really is no help for you. "
I'm not "so much smarter than everyone else", but I AM smarter than you!! (If nothing else, at least I can comprehend the words as they are written!) - Reply to this comment
- by chevyhotrod December 21, 2010 11:04 AM EST
Fox News, Fox News, Fox News, Fox News, Fox News, Fox News.
Yes, I read your post and laughed.
You might have read it, but you're obviously not smart enough to have understood it!! - Reply to this comment
