[Genghis Khan]

Debating rik is like debating the Wall street journal editorial page. He has all the talking points memorized, without even beginning to truly comprehend what those "solutions" mean.

Where in the fuck did you get the idiotic idea that Obama is a liberal?

Won't work. I already gave him a list of all the small business tax cuts that Obama signed into law, and he still keep saying that Obama hikes taxes. Just for reference, out of politifact.com -

1. A new small business health care tax credit

2. A new tax credit for hiring unemployed workers

3. Bonus depreciation tax incentives to support new investment

4. 75 percent exclusion of small business capital gains

5. Expansion of limits on small business expensing

6. Five-year carryback of net operating losses

7. Reduction of the built-in gains holding period for small businesses from 10 to 7 years to allow small business greater flexibility in their investments

8. Temporary small business estimated tax payment relief to allow small businesses to keep needed cash on hand

From the Small Business Jobs Act:

9. Zero capital gains taxes on key investments in small businesses

10. Raising the small business expensing to $500,000

11. An extension of 50 percent bonus depreciation

12. A new deduction for health care expenses for the self-employed

13. Tax relief and simplification for cell phone deductions

14. An increase in the deduction for entrepreneurs’ start-up expenses

15. A five-year carryback of general business credits

16. Limitations on penalties for errors in tax reporting that disproportionately affect small business

From the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act:

17. 100 percent expensing

The fact is, rik isn't ready to internalize the truth yet. He still has too much invested in the talking points he picked up, and isn't prepared to give them up. It'll happen at some point, but that takes time.

BTW, calling Obama liberal is like calling Teddy Roosevelt conservative.

[Rudolf Prikryl]

When I say the public school system is failing, I didn't mean every student I too know students who are among the best.

You asked "what do public schools do besides fail students," and so I answered and you moved your goalposts.
Remember that thing about being an insufferable pedant and moving the goalposts? Don't do that please.

Lack of funding? Do you live in the same America I do? Education is among the most funded government sectors. ~$11,000 per pupil.

If you're looking for a sector that is constantly being cut, it's defense, not education.

We already spend more per student than most other countries. Yet you want even more spending?

Too many high salaried administrators in the public school system. They all earn union wages and pensions. This takes away money meant to teach the kids. So if education needs more money, look into cutting administrators.

Have you been paying attention at all? Look at what happened in California and tell me that austerity doesn't target education close to first.

I agree. Public schools need less oversight bureaucracy (and a refocusing of whatever is left to actually be effective) and more direct teacher management with higher teacher wages.
But look again at the graph, it's really not the "best funded government sector."

And you might want to go back to school to brush up on those reading skills, the stories about "Cuts to defense spending" are not actually cuts but slowly decreasing amounts of budget increases over long periods of time, which is not a "cut" at all in the sense that "cut" is used to, you know, actually decrease current operating budgets in other programs.

By the way,

The military isn't run by the government. That may surprise you, but the military runs the military, not the bureaucrats.

It's commanded by a civilian President and receives funding from Congress via the taxpayers. Explain exactly to me how that isn't a government program.

Fannie and Freddie - bankrupt
US government - bankrupt
US debt - gargantuan

So you're going to blame the bankruptcy of two private institutions which were then nationalized essentially after bankruptcy on the US government. Yeah.
As far as I know the US gov't is hardly "bankrupt" right now unless "YOUR Republicans" fail to raise the debt limit i.e. press that big red "economic suicide" button.
But you're right, and it isn't just US debt... if anything happens as described in the WSJ article (or in the wonderful below risk maps), and we have a default scenario or other some such economic apocalypse, that debt cascade won't be limited to the US, and you can basically kiss Capitalism goodbye. Hope you enjoy owning a bunch of worthless paper telling you how much money you used to own as the mob tears down your gate, wrecks your private jet and likely guillotines you... if you are in fact a millionaire as you claim.





The pentagram shape is actually quite representative.. and this was BEFORE the latest bailout, so just keep on increasing those numbers!

war against drugs - lost
illegal immigration - out of control
public school system - poor graduation rate, and poor quality students
Also, the school meal program is not working. Most of that food is going in the trash. Another example of government waste.

Yeah, the war against drugs was a pointless waste of money from the outset, we should have seriously considered a legalization program for illegal immigrants (because the alternative plays out like http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2011/06/17/gas-farm-labor-crisis-playing-out-as-planned/ which speeds up that whole collapse thing.. McCain was right!), we should have kicked corporate meddling in school meal programs and seriously started and funded local sourced, healthy meals, etc. etc.

In some regards, you're correct, but missing the forest for the trees. America is going in the shit from decades and decades of mismanagement and corruption from BOTH sides of the aisle and a deficit run up by pointless military campaigns and massive bank bailouts needed mainly thanks to steady de-regulation since Reagan's times. Another success for the free market and deregulation.

[TruePolitics]

Personally, I like the story of Robin Hood who was fighting on the side of the poor. Rob the rich to feed the poor. That's how I feel. In fact in most fantasy literature the good side are the poor people and the evil side are the rich. Cinderella, A Christmas Carol, Jack and the Beanstock...what are some other examples?? Those stories are what make me want to support the poor and fight against the rich.

[Suska]

Rudolf those are some pretty fancy graphics, where did you get them?

[Rudolf Prikryl]

I am part of a few other political forums, so I usually save a good one when I see one for later.

most of the graphs on the last page are from a Mother Jones report on U.S. wealth disparity, sourcing gov't data: http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph
The RIM is from the WEF: http://riskreport.weforum.org/ (p. 61 is the 2011 map.. a bit different looking but essentially all the same stuff)
the Europe debt map is from the NYT, sourcing the Bank for International Settlements: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/05/02/weekinreview/02marsh.html
Tax Break infographic is from CAP, again with a multitude of gov't sources at the bottom of the page: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/02/tax_breaks_infographic.html
the Debt by President was from a google search (I'd seen it but hadn't saved it), but all of the other similar graphs from political sources from both political parties are essentially the same.

[Suska]

Got your ducks in a row, good man, interesting stuff too.

[Rei Murasame]

Debating rik is like debating the Wall street journal editorial page. He has all the talking points memorized, without even beginning to truly comprehend what those "solutions" mean.

Ah, I knew it seemed familiar! Yes, it did surprise me a bit that after I washed the place in graphs and explanations, he somehow managed to claim that more free market would be "the solution" to the problem I had described.

[Drlee]

US government - bankrupt

Nonsense. The US Government is far from bankrupt. FAR. Actually the US Government is very wealthy.
It will take in over 2 trillion dollars this year with cash out for interest on the national debt of 389 billion. That leaves them 1.6 trillion to spend without raising taxes. But guess what. The Bush tax cuts would have almost singlehandedly paid for the national debt.

While we are on the subject the Bush tax cuts cost the government FAR more than Obamacare.

US debt - gargantuan

Pretty Big alright. And some assholes don't think we should pay it down. You know. The morons who beleive that we should not raise taxes to pay it. We can always lower them later. What is the harm in paying our bills for a change.

The ignorance of the new right is astonishing.

Let the wealthy put their money where their mouth is. Here is the secret most of the right wing morons can't get their minds around. The wealthy, when faced with the option of taking their money as highly taxed income ore reinvest it choose to reinvest it so it is not taxed. Low taxes incentivise the rich to NOT reinvest their money. So low taxes reduce investment in business not increase it.

The military isn't run by the government. That may surprise you, but the military runs the military, not the bureaucrats.

It is this kind of utterly stupid comment that makes these debates so annoying to thinking people. How do you respond to lunacy like that? It reflects a total lack of understanding of the military and how it works. Pure hyperbole. Never mind the absurd notion implicit in his comment that the military is some kind of paragon of thrift.

So let's set this fellow straight on the subject. At the risk of repeating what others have said.

The President is the Commander and Chief

Congress appoints military officers and confirms leadership.

Congress decides how much money the military gets and on what they can spend.

Congress exercizes control over virtually all large DOD spending programs frequently overriding the wishes of the uniformed leadership.

The Secretary of Defense and his deputies exercize control over all of the uniformed military leadership.

The Secretary of the Army for example "outranks" every Army General. So do his assistants and deputies acting under his authority.

Their are 700,000 civilians working for the Department of Defense.

Virtually all contracting actions undertaken by the military are managed by DOD civilians. There are very few uniformed personnel working day to day in contracting actions and the ones who do are usually low-level contracting officers and project managers.

How do you argue with this level of ignorance? I find it appalling.

[grassroots1]

^Exactly, and how does that differ from any other government program? The president appoints a leader, congress determines funding, etc. Exactly what makes the military separate from other "government programs?" If one can be run efficiently, why not others? It's true, I read that statement and felt like slamming my head into the keyboard instead of continuing the discussion.

[rik]

Debating rik is like debating the Wall street journal editorial page. He has all the talking points memorized, without even beginning to truly comprehend what those "solutions" mean.

Quite being so feeble-minded.

Nonsense. The US Government is far from bankrupt. FAR. Actually the US Government is very wealthy.

That is just a dumb response. $14.5 Trillion in debt is wealthy?
The only reason we still appear solvent, is because other sensible nations are prepared to lend us money, and we can print money out of thin air.

I see so many of you were taken aback by my statement: The military isn't run by the government. That may surprise you, but the military runs the military, not the bureaucrats.

I knew this would be difficult for a typical Liberal to understand.

Technically, the government runs the military, but the military is not your typical government program. It has its own code of conduct not defined by politicians. It can declare Martial law and overthrow the politicians if things get out of hand. In that regard, the military is a government onto itself.

The military works, because it's not run day-to-day by our crooked politicians.

No government program works. They're all failures of colossal proportion. I gave a long list earlier of these programs. Some jokers in here have tried to debunk them, but they all failed. Your lackadaisical attempts are nevertheless entertaining pieces.


This thread has lost focus.

May I remind everybody that we're talking about phony Liberals who feign disgust for wealthy people, when they themselves live in opulence?
And about phony poor Liberals who feign disgust for rich people, even though the rich pays his welfare.

If you want to tell me that being rich is immoral, then explain why any Liberal is rich. A true Liberal should give away all his wealth to charity, until he has no more money than his neighbor. Equality is what you Liberals preach, isn't it?

Funny how no Liberal wants to address these poignant points.

[rik]

Ah, I knew it seemed familiar! Yes, it did surprise me a bit that after I washed the place in graphs and explanations, he somehow managed to claim that more free market would be "the solution" to the problem I had described.

Patting yourself in the back there, aren't you.

Your graphs don't mean squat.

Interesting how you ignored my explanation of why free market ideas aren't working. They can't work under big government control, which is essentially what he have with these misguided Liberals.

If the role of our government can be limited to tax collection, and most importantly, the enforcement of private ownership, then sure free market system would work. Instead, we have a controlled market, in which Obama's iron fist directly regulates everything.

The bottom line is, for free market ideas to excel, the forces of demand and supply must not be hindered.

[grassroots1]

Technically, the government runs the military, (1) but the military is not your typical government program. It has its own code of conduct not defined by politicians. It can declare Martial law and overthrow the politicians if things get out of hand. In that regard, the military is a government onto itself.

The military works, because it's not run day-to-day by our crooked politicians. (2)

No government program works. (3)

Without responding to anything else, these statements are clearly contradictory. The question you consistently fail to answer:

Exactly what makes the military separate from other "government programs?" If one can be run efficiently, why not others?

Obama's iron fist

Can we have a discussion without this kind of hyperbole? Obama is not freaking Stalin.

[Drlee]

I see so many of you were taken aback by my statement: The military isn't run by the government. That may surprise you, but the military runs the military, not the bureaucrats.

I knew this would be difficult for a typical Liberal to understand.

This "typical liberal" spent 20 years in the Army including leadership positions. Don't you presume to lecture me. I have forgotten more about the military than you will likely ever know.

Technically, the government runs the military, but the military is not your typical government program. It has its own code of conduct not defined by politicians. It can declare Martial law and overthrow the politicians if things get out of hand. In that regard, the military is a government onto itself.

Utter bullshit. Not a shread of truth here. Google the oath of office for a military officer. I recommend you enlist. You would find it broadening. I doubt you could hack it but it might teach you something. Starting with "I do solemnly swear to support and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic....."

You are really going to have to do better than this. Start by googling "martial Law".

The military is peopled by Americans far better versed in their constitution than you are and comitted to dying for it. NO ONE in the military thinks of it as "a government unto itself". That is an idiotic notion and the very notion would be anathema to any serving solder, not to mention military leader.

Clear your head of that nonsense. If one of my soldiers spouted nonsense like that I would have them in extra training until they learned what it meant to be a soldier. There is a word for the kind of action you think soldiers might take. It is called mutiny, or perhaps treason. We don't like folks like that in the military. They are an insult to every soldier who died to defend our constitution: Especially the part about civilian control of the military. It is something any good soldier is proud of.

[rik]

How would that actually improve anything though? Also, none of that addresses the issue of preventative care.

If you can't see how tort reform would reduce health care cost, then we're just wasting time debating.

Preventative care is no different than any other care. They all cost money. If costs can be brought down, then everybody would have access.

As long as government has its grubby hands in health care, health care is always going to be expensive.

As for many of the graphs you posted regarding US position in the world, you are somebody who is blinded by statistics. But you actually lack an intimate understanding of why some things are the way they are. You furnish numbers without knowing what they mean.

Take the US society for instance. It's invaded by millions of low class people from south of the border. There is a federal law that states that people must be treated without regard to their ability to pay. That means that our medical system is burdened by deadbeats. We do not see this dilemma in other countries that you showed on your graphs.

Most of your comparisons are apples to oranges. They do not show the situation on the ground. So for example, although the US has a higher quality medical system, it has a high cancer mortality, because cheap bastards obtain expensive treatment for free, etc, etc.

It's tough debating people like you. This is because you do not understand that which you speak about. So ultimately, one has to basically spell an otherwise common knowledge, out to you. I'm not being condescending, just making an observation.

[rik]

This "typical liberal" spent 20 years in the Army including leadership positions. Don't you presume to lecture me. I have forgotten more about the military than you will likely ever know

The debate is not about you. You're too small.

You say a lot of stuff, while not really saying anything.

[grassroots1]

Most of your comparisons are apples to oranges. They do not show the situation on the ground. So for example, although the US has a higher quality medical system, it has a high cancer mortality, because cheap bastards obtain expensive treatment for free, etc, etc.

You need to source your claims, buddy. Where is the evidence that people are receiving expensive treatments for free? Where did you hear this, where does it happen?

[rik]

Without responding to anything else, these statements are clearly contradictory.

Well, show me your proof. You're talking the talk. Time to walk the walk buddy.

I've asked you Liberals a few times now for government programs that work. You can't answer.

I gave a long list of failed, bankrupt programs. I want to see your list of thriving successful government programs. In fact, I'm just asking for ONE.

The military is the only thing anybody could point to. And we've reached an impasse on who really runs the military - the politicians or the officers. So the military doesn't count.

Most Liberals are scatterbrains. They don't know how to distill a discussion down to the essentials. They just want to talk and talk.

[grassroots1]

Well, we gave you multiple, I think. The military was one, the EPA was another, OSHA was another, FEMA, the NHS systems in Canada and the UK are both functional and less expensive than health care in America... what more do you need? Government programs can be functional. I'm not sure what more there is to say.

FEMA failed in New Orleans, but only as a result of poor administration. This is the problem, I think. Our government has been disabled in America and the establishment has managed to convince people that this is because "government" as an entity in general, does not work. This is false, and you can see this, for example, from the educational system in Finland.

[youtube]0__9s3A2pcA[/youtube]

And you still haven't provided data... why?

[rik]

You need to source your claims, buddy. Where is the evidence that people are receiving expensive treatments for free? Where did you hear this, where does it happen?

I'm sure if I said Obama is the president, you would ask me to source it. Too many zombies on this site.

Are you serious! Do you live in America? How do you not know that illegal aliens receive free treatment in our hospitals. Hospitals are shutting down because of this.

Even if you didn't know this before, which in itself baffles me, why do you have the Internet, if you can't use it to fetch information you need?

Anyway, put this into a search engine:

"hospitals closing due to illegal immigrants"

You should get some 350,000 results. Would that be enough sourcing for you?

Happy reading.

[grassroots1]

This might be common knowledge where you're from, but not here. Don't denigrate me because I'm not aware of something. All I said is that you should source your claims, which you haven't done in this ENTIRE thread.