Obama Care

I took the information you provided here as the reason for "the decline in poverty" in the sixties Saden. Good Christ, read your own posts.

You get mighty belligerent around bedtime. Get some sleep and stop embarassing yourself.


I originally intended to include "and poverty was reduced by ~100%" in my response but I figured that was something obvious that I shouldn't have to restate. On a real tip though you know what's really embarrassing? Your utter failure to comprehend my response to you. Let me further simplify for you:

You: The poverty rate declined because the government stole more money from the rich (producers) and gave it to the poor (bums).

Me: Taxes were reduced in the early 60's (top rate went from 91% to 70%) and poverty was reduced by ~100% (from Information I provided...thanks for the heads-up :rolleyes:).


Your engine light is blinking, time to take it to the shop before you go Buster.

A touchscreen blackberry in a leather belt-clip and fresh all-white nikes don't exactly scream unemployed, but maybe he was. And maybe he was shopping for someone else. Again, that's why called it a random rant. My perception of him was assumptive. It's certainly possible I assumed wrongly. In this case I kind of doubt it though.
My first job I had was working at a grocery store which was surrounded by goverment subsidize housing. Thats when I learned first hand how bad the system is abused. They would buy very expensive food products then pay for it with their food stamps and then I would then load them up in their new cars. This was an everyday thing and at that age I just could not figure out how these people could get food stamps in the first place. Then came the next summer (I only worked while on summer break) and the same people using food stamps getting in their even newer car while my family was working for everything we had. I know some people really need food stamps but the abuse from what I saw out weighed the people who actually needed food stamps.

it is stupid. why give anyone anything, for the fear of the system being manipulated far outweighs the real need for help? does anyone realize how foolish this sounds?

Finally Joe, you're using something other than a jab. Now that the jabs are out of the way let me get right to the heart of the matter, the invisible hand with respect to universal healthcare. I am bewildered by the notion that the invisible hand can and does play a role in the healthcare setting. How does the invisible hand help Aunt Jane avoid medical bankruptcy or help Uncle Joe get his two kids, himself and his wife covered whilst making $10 an hour? Sure, nothing precludes them from making more money thanks to the invisible hand but do you realize that poor people have been with us since the dawn of time? I know, it's hard to believe right?

...

With respect to CRR's post it is clear to me that neither individuals nor charities (invisible hands) have been able to solve the problem. And if I'm not mistaken S10's original gripe was with the pending proposal to cut DSH funding by the government. It was pretty obvious to me that he shitted on the first part of the quote with the second part.

I'm not entirely sure what is meant by self-righteous Joe. This label is quite perplexing seeing how it's being placed by you. Try as you may you still can't land an effective punch Joe, you really need to work on your lower/upper body strength.

Saden, First, as you said the invisible hand of charities did not solve the problem, of course like you also pointed out, this is a problem that has always been with us, and the fact is that the invisible wallet of government is a far more inefficient method to take care of the problem.

Second, as to Joe's landing punches, sadly you are like a boxer who is badly beaten, yet once out of the ring stands and proclaims the other guy never landed a punch. It is either an amazing amount of arrogance, or pure lunacy, that allows that boxer to make that claim. In your case though it is probably a mix of both.

it is stupid. why give anyone anything, for the fear of the system being manipulated far outweighs the real need for help? does anyone realize how foolish this sounds?

If thats in response to what I posted thats not what I said. I just stated that the system is abused. The problem is that there is no real checks and balance in the system.

first, its like anything else. any program/ system that is set up by anyone, will eventually be hi-jacked by someone.that someone is always looking for the easy way out. but you cant penalize the people that need it. im not in agreement with the new proposal. but something definitely needs done

first, its like anything else. any program/ system that is set up by anyone, will eventually be hi-jacked by someone.that someone is always looking for the easy way out. but you cant penalize the people that need it. im not in agreement with the new proposal. but something definitely needs done

We agree that people will take advantage of the system but if you have low standars then it allows alot of people to take advantage of the system. Their are family trees that have generations of family members that rely on goverment assistance. At some point we have to make them accountable for themself and their family and tell them they need to get a job.

Saden, First, as you said the invisible hand of charities did not solve the problem, of course like you also pointed out, this is a problem that has always been with us, and the fact is that the invisible wallet of government is a far more inefficient method to take care of the problem.

Second, as to Joe's landing punches, sadly you are like a boxer who is badly beaten, yet once out of the ring stands and proclaims the other guy never landed a punch. It is either an amazing amount of arrogance, or pure lunacy, that allows that boxer to make that claim. In your case though it is probably a mix of both.


I showed you a concrete example of what the government can do with respect to poverty and all you seem to do is talk...blah blah blah. Compared to charities and individuals the government is certainly more effective.


It is required to be 33% (and growing) because of the misguided belief that government, better than individuals and charities, can help solve individual hardship, and that in a country as grand as ours, no one should go without.Get that weak stuff out of here. Work on your game cause you really can't be in the ring with me let alone throw a punch.

Please explain how the federal government/infrastructure allows private individuals & companies to make money? As far as the government infrastructure goes we already pay for that, far more than we should. The government provides military to make sure we don't get taken over, OK. Interstate roads receive federal funding, I get it. Possibly some oversight into banking and finance, OK I get that too. What else could the fed possibly do to make sure I have "hard earned money"? I'd gladly keep my 7.8 or so percent of my paycheck for SS and Medicare and handle my own retirement. States/localities provide over 94% of education funding. Police and Fire are provided through state and local taxes.

You will recall, I'm sure, from your history lessons that there was no income tax in the U.S. until the early part of the 20th century. The country was doing just fine economically without it.

SS and Medicare are not everything there is to government/infrastructure. How much money do you think you'd make if there was no government? None, because there would be no money. Would you prefer a barter system?

Keep in mind, the Federal government is not the only type.

It also seems you're suggesting that before the income tax, there was no government? Not sure how the income tax has anything to do with the government enabling you to make money.

I was at the grocery store today, and some idiot in front of me was trying to pay for his food with his food stamps card. It kept getting declined, and I sat there waiting for a good 10 minutes while he tried to get it figured out. In the meantime, while he was berating the cashier, I was checking out his nice new looking cell phone and shiny new sneakers. Good thing we give him food stamps so he can use his extra cash for the best kicks and hottest cell phone. I'm so happy my taxes are paying for his meals. :doh:

But yeah, government needs to keep getting bigger (while our deficit becomes more and more comical). Politics are so broken.

Maybe he was buying food for his disabled mother? Maybe it was for his sister with a few kids, who's husband ran off? Don't be so quick to judge.