A Complete Waste of Space

Pudfark wrote:Get yer facts straight, Slick. I served the public for 27 years.

you were paid by the government.

I don't want nor feel the need to pay for the indebtedness incurred by you and yours over the past couple of years. Health care has benefited no one. The billion/trillion dollar bailouts have only benefited the "select" few. Not to mention the 600 billion fed bail out last week....Thanx for the inflation.

the healthcare bill is revenue neutral, most of the bailouts have or will be repaid, and the Fed thing didn't affect taxation. What you don't wish to pay for is the built-in deficit as a result of the Bush giveaways and two wars.

I have my own health insurance and my own paid for pension. I make my own bed, cook my own meals, wash my own dishes, pay my own bills....a concept foreign to you.

It's a good thing for you that you have inherited well....based on the comments you make here? You couldn't make it on your own.

you are a clueless fuck, aren't you?

callmeslick wrote:While I am going to address this as a US topic, it certainly pertains to all of you, worldwide.
I think it might be a good idea to get away from the trivia fest that passes for 'hot button' political topics and take a look at a proposal that came out yesterday. The sources were the two chairmen of the Task Force on Deficit Reduction, Erskine Bowles(d) and Alan Simpson(r). These two are very good men(although I have serious doubts about the committee they 'lead'), and presented a plan that will trim $4 Trillion off the deficit by 2020. The outline of the details is here:
http://documents.nytimes.com/draft-prop ... ocument/p1

now this thing is pretty complex, but what strikes me is the immediate political response. The Dems like some parts, but say other parts are 'non-starters'. Few if any Republicans are willing to comment. It will be interesting to see if the folks, newly elected to demands for fiscal reform, will be willing or able to actually succeed. Any thoughts on this plan?

Oh, and Simpson, who I've always found to be funny, had a great line. He noted that folks should seek he and Bowles out soon, as they will probably end this process in the Witness Protection Program.....

ah, yet ANOTHER government agency...wtf, how about kill them and we'll save the money we would have spent on their salaries??

they proposed unsubstantiated cuts i.e. spending abroad (how much is wasted, like teaching africans to clean their cocks, how much is well spent, like watering systems in third world countries) and wishful thinking like house and senate will turn in wasteful spending so those budgets can be cut?? name ONE politician who thinks earmarks for his state are wasteful??
what is the "Cut and Invest Committee"? ah, another bunch of asshole politicians sucking up tax payer money

I'm amazed thinking like this isn't tarred feathered and mocked publicly.

callmeslick wrote:
the healthcare bill is revenue neutral, most of the bailouts have or will be repaid, and the Fed thing didn't affect taxation.

you are a clueless fuck, aren't you?

slick, he isn't the only clueless one. Seriously. google should be your friend.
just saying "healthcare bill is revenue neutral" makes you sound like some liberal sheep quoting your progressives wish list.
Insurance cannot work like that. Insurance requires a pool of healthy people to cover those of us who get unexpectedly sick. That's why the requirement to insurance companies to cover all comers has to be accompanied by an enforceable requirement to individuals to buy insurance. Otherwise the whole plan collapses. Let obama care collapse or repeal it next year.

Good Lord man...are we better off now than we were 4 trillion ago??
Pay back?? will that restore the billions lost in home values?

Blame bush, blame obama, but get off your collectives asses and realize you're getting played. Again.
wake up, read- look at your money and taxes and eroding freedoms.

Below, is a "clueless" example....

callmeslick wrote:the healthcare bill is revenue neutral, most of the bailouts have or will be repaid, and the Fed thing didn't affect taxation. What you don't wish to pay for is the built-in deficit as a result of the Bush giveaways and two wars.

*************************************************************************************************************************************************

You cannot prove one word of it...factually or historically. The only way the health care bill will ever be deficit neutral is upon it's repeal. With the current economic depression, that bailout money ain't exactly rolling in...I never said "the Fed thing" would affect taxation, I said "inflation". What I said I don't wish to pay for is in this paragraph. Anything else is your mindless meandering and deliberate misunderstanding.

Try to grasp this concept...." getting serious about the National Debt."
Cut spending.
Cut Taxes.
Incur no further debt.
Create a favorable atmosphere for productivity and jobs.
Prosecute all the thieving bastards that got us in this predicament...
Elect responsible, honest people with a known history of integrity.

That's getting serious, anything else is bullshit.

Old Pudfark sez: " It don't take a sharp wit....It takes an honest individual with a sharp knife.. "

Dawg wrote:they proposed unsubstantiated cuts i.e. spending abroad (how much is wasted, like teaching africans to clean their cocks, how much is well spent, like watering systems in third world countries) and wishful thinking like house and senate will turn in wasteful spending so those budgets can be cut?? name ONE politician who thinks earmarks for his state are wasteful??
what is the "Cut and Invest Committee"? ah, another bunch of asshole politicians sucking up tax payer money

I'm amazed thinking like this isn't tarred feathered and mocked publicly.

I'm amazed you post with the premise you have the first clue. How, pray tell, would YOU propose to reverse the deficit?

Dawg wrote:Blame bush, blame obama, but get off your collectives asses and realize you're getting played. Again.

now, Dawg, those are words I can agree with.....it's just how you propose to remedy it that puzzles me.

wake up, read- look at your money and taxes and eroding freedoms.

well, this proposes little, if folks don't understand the true nature of the problem, and thus far, you haven't.
What is your proposal, or what are your group of proposals that will:
1. Eliminate the debt(over time)
2. Restore 'freedoms'(which ones, and do you plan on taking away others to get there?)
3. Maintain a society in which most people can thrive(we would agree, I think, that some folks are
always going to 'fall through the cracks'.

Pudfark wrote:Try to grasp this concept...." getting serious about the National Debt."

I have been..... lets see how you do.

Cut spending.

what spending? We need specifics, and remember, folks who get elected to office have to vote for these.

Cut Taxes.

well, if your cuts above didn't amount to roughly 1.1 trillion dollars per year, you can't even start to think about this one.

Incur no further debt.

see above, and when you're done with that task, start to look for your crystal ball. Why? Because unforseen shit happens
all the time, and unless you can maintain the financial flexibility to deal with those, you have a problem with this one.

Create a favorable atmosphere for productivity and jobs.

well, that sounds good, but how does a drastically reduced government have the ability to do that? First, you've had
to lay off thousands making your cuts, and we clearly cannot afford to fight overseas, so those folks are back stateside
in need of employment. I can see getting productivity up, but the jobs part.......

Prosecute all the thieving bastards that got us in this predicament...

as I've said for 6 years here, the responsible parties are ALL of us, we let a process happen, before ours eyes, over several
administrations, and said NOTHING, done NOTHING.

Elect responsible, honest people with a known history of integrity.

the exact type our political system weeds out, fast.

That's getting serious, anything else is bullshit.

that's a bunch of gibberish, made to sound like a plan. Thank God you are not in charge......

Old Pudfark sez: " It don't take a sharp wit....It takes an honest individual with a sharp knife.. "

you have no idea how often one wishes that such an individual was within arm's reach of you, Pud......

you have no idea how often one wishes that such an individual was within arm's reach of you, Pud......

Want a hug?

Wullie wrote:

you have no idea how often one wishes that such an individual was within arm's reach of you, Pud......

Want a hug?

now that's just creepy.

Exactly how does a bill that's supposed to give universal health care to all manage to have a clause in it that forces me to 1099 anyone and everyone I do business with?