Billions for war, not one cent for children's health insurance

[sirs]

I'm not against school vouchers.

Did I say you were?  I made clear reference that you apparently are condemning a report on Government waste, based soley on where the report is coming from.  Which is ironically a legitimate position, as I would from some report claiming racially motivated attacks & discrimination from the likes of the Congressional Black Caucus or the NAACP.

I must assume that you require some validate form of waste from an organzation that sings the praises of Government intervention.  I think it's going to require a massive climate change in Hell, before that happens

[_JS]

I must assume that you require some validate form of waste from an organzation that sings the praises of Government intervention.  I think it's going to require a massive climate change in Hell, before that happens

No. That is incorrect. I'll certainly look at reports from a plethora of organisations that examine the Government's spending. Including the Government itself. They actually do a fairly decent job of reporting their own spending, under FASAB and GAAP standards. The plain truth is that most people just don't know how to read and understand them.

Moreover, Governmental finance is far different from private finance because the underlying philosophy is different. In private finance the eye is on the bottom line and ultimately having revenue exceed expense. In Government the eye is on expense and ultimately having revenue equal expense. I know you hate the phrase, but in general it is much more complicated (primarily due to legal frameworks and dedicated funding sources).

A place like Heritage Foundation doesn't give any background they just toss a number about. It may or may not even be true. Most likely, it is not.

I've worked in both sectors.

[hnumpah]

...and just as wrong as your previous opinionated assumption

Thank you for proving my point.

[sirs]

And you, mine

[Universe Prince]

No, you don't understand Michael. In the United States, everything the public sector does that is not military is automatically bloated and wasteful.

Whereas; everything the private sector does is wonderful, efficent, effective, beautiful, polished, and dances through alpine meadows picking edelweiss with two blonde ponytails singing heavenly arias.

Cute, but dumb. Neither statement expresses a position I hold. But they were amusing.

People have said so, and it must be true. Otherwise completely laissez faire capitalism is not the panacea of all that ails humanity. And we know that cannot be the case (except with the military).

I understand you want a government run universal health care system, and I understand that you think I'm crazy for suggesting anything else could possibly work. But I did not suggest capitalism was a panacea for anything. And in point of fact, the network I'd like to see in place rather than a government run program is not really a capitalistic network, which you should know, JS, because I've explained the basic idea to you before.

In any case, people who talk like the government is the panacea for society's problems shouldn't throw stones at people who might have similar ideas about capitalism.

[sirs]

No, you don't understand Michael. In the United States, everything the public sector does that is not military is automatically bloated and wasteful.  Whereas; everything the private sector does is wonderful, efficent, effective, beautiful, polished, and dances through alpine meadows picking edelweiss with two blonde ponytails singing heavenly arias.

Cute, but dumb. Neither statement expresses a position I hold. But they were amusing.

Ditto     

[Universe Prince]

If government healthcare is bloated and wasteful, why is it that every other developed nation on the friggin' planet (a) has publicly funded healthcare and (b) pays far LESS for it?

Because they want government to provide for them and the governments enacted price controls. And they're having trouble with the funding. Just because other people do something doesn't mean it's the best idea.

I suggest that BLOATED and WASTEFUL is a good description of free enterprise healthcare,

What free enterprise healthcare? You mean the one with all the government run programs involved?

not socialized medicine, which is a damned good idea whose time has come.

Come and gone.

[Plane]

Do you really think the Ontario Government universal health-care plan (OHIP) is "bloated and wasteful?"  Do you really think it's any more "inflexible" than any private health-care insurance company would be?  Where's the evidence for any of that?

No, you don't understand Michael. In the United States, everything the public sector does that is not military is automatically bloated and wasteful.

Whereas; everything the private sector does is wonderful, efficient, effective, beautiful, polished, and dances through alpine meadows picking edelweiss with two Blondie ponytails singing heavenly arias.

People have said so, and it must be true. Otherwise completely laissez faire capitalism is not the panacea of all that ails humanity. And we know that cannot be the case (except with the military).

Any data you have to the contrary may be sent to the Department of Defense or your nearest Wall Street Journal representative.

Are you complaining about the hyperbole?

Who is using such hyperbole?

The reverse of course would be to claim that the Civil service is entirely competant and totally dependable, I know you are not guilty of hyperbole as extreme as that.

[Plane]

"...silly comment that would seem to indicate anyone whose opinion runs counter to yours isn't worth anything."

Now...

Ain't that a common problem?

[hnumpah]

Ain't that a common problem?

Nope.

[_JS]

I was making a humorous commentary about the way some people think.

I wasn't talking about you, personally, Prince. We've discussed enough topics that I hope we've developed a respect for one another's views.

Unfortunately, there are many who do buy into the above line of thinking without putting in any of their own thought at all. Whereas you'll find it very rare that anyone goes to the opposite extreme, a victory for neoliberalism I suppose, but not for the thinking world.

[sirs]

I was making a humorous commentary about the way some people think....Unfortunately, there are many who do buy into the above line of thinking without putting in any of their own thought at all.

What "some" people would those be, Js?

[_JS]

I was making a humorous commentary about the way some people think....Unfortunately, there are many who do buy into the above line of thinking without putting in any of their own thought at all.

What "some" people would those be, Js?

People for whom the commentary applies.

Since when does humerous social commentary need endless explanation? I think most people here read it and saw the humor in it rather quickly. It is OK to laugh, even at one's own expense, is it not?

[sirs]

I was making a humorous commentary about the way some people think....Unfortunately, there are many who do buy into the above line of thinking without putting in any of their own thought at all.

What "some" people would those be, Js?

People for whom the commentary applies.

Well, that sure clarifies things       

[Universe Prince]

I wasn't talking about you, personally, Prince. We've discussed enough topics that I hope we've developed a respect for one another's views.

I'd like to think we have.

Unfortunately, there are many who do buy into the above line of thinking without putting in any of their own thought at all. Whereas you'll find it very rare that anyone goes to the opposite extreme, a victory for neoliberalism I suppose, but not for the thinking world.

Having been on the receiving end of arguments from folks who think any talk about individual liberty is the same as suggesting all people should live in isolation and die alone and unloved, I wouldn't say that I think the opposite extreme is so rare. But you're correct that some folks don't think about issues past the spin points.