Text 14336, 80 rader
Skriven 2007-05-10 11:23:11 av Kurt Ullman (706.babylon5)
     Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: OT: a proposal for increasing teachers' salaries
============================================================
In article <pd9543l1ca7c2e310itsthuhm5mo2dem8i@4ax.com>,
 Josh Hill <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> >> A reference to authority doesn't constitute simplification.
> 
> >      Don't see a reference to anything remotely resembling an 
> >authority. Just unnamed and unnumbered "economists". who just so happen 
> >to agree with you.. or so you say.
> 
> Kurt, argue the facts or not at all. I am not going to trouble myself
> debunking your obnoxious insinuations.
>  

   Fine give me a fact to work with. You have just given these 
generalities as to what economists have said, but nothing that I can 
look to see WHO is saying and what is being said. All I ask is for a 
name, a study, etc. 

> >> >> When the deficit is excessive from an economic perspective, you raise
> >> >> taxes or cut services.
> >> 
> >> >   No, you raise taxes. There never has been a time where they cut 
> >> >services or even eliminated programs that were no longer needed or 
> >> >working.
> >> 
> >> Programs have been cut numerous times. Overall spending increases, but
> >> that's to be expected, given that population increases and we grow
> >> wealthier and so better able to afford them.
> >
> >      Other than military when the Dems are in power, name me one that 
> >is really cut. I don't mean in relation to what "should have been" with 
> >the last year plus basis, but a real honest-to-Gawd real money cut.
> 
> "Other than the military?" You've just ruled out the most obvious
> example of what I said.
           You said programs have been cut. That indicates more than 
one. Although it is nice that you agree with me that Dems cut military 
spending as their major place to do that. 

> Entitlement programs grow by nature, as they should. If you're
> interested in specific non-military programs that have been cut, check
> out the Gringrich years. We've been discussing some of them here, in
> fact -- support for the arts and public radio.
    Why should entitlements grow as a given. Heck if anything most 
should go down. There has never been a cut in real terms. Most of the 
"cuts" in both the RR and Gingrich years were in the automatic raises 
from one year to the next, never in real terms. To which I hold both of 
them personally responsibile.
      I knew we were lost even with RR and NG when we couldn't even get 
the Helium reserve unfunded.. 

> 
> >Since we are better able to afford things, that means revenue is going 
> >up and the tax cuts worked. Glad you finally came around on that one. 
> 
> No, it doesn't, because the fact that revenue goes up doesn't mean
> that the tax cuts worked, merely that the economy grew, as it usually
> does.
         Giggle. 


> >      No, they were full of substance. The substance was that your posts 
> >lacked any. Some undefined "people's" are responding in a way that 
> >certainly agrees with you.  
> 
> Kurt, I am here to have a friendly discussion of the issues, not to
> have my integrity impugned. As a psychologist, I'm sure you know that
> not infrequently, the accusations that people make about others say
> more about their own conscious and unconscious agendas than they do
> about those of the other party. I will leave you to ponder that and
> the rest of this post unread, because your constant insults and
> insinuations are getting me hot under my collar and, as I said
> earlier, I don't want to inconvenience the moderators.
>     
     All I asked for are citations for your overarching statements about 
what economists all say, etc. You haven't given me one yet, but you keep 
saying them.
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)