Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Perdue Proposes $1 Billion Spending Increase (Republican spending spree)
wsb radio (Atlanta) ^ | 1/13/05 | wsb radio

Posted on 01/13/2005 3:38:25 AM PST by from occupied ga

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-61 last
To: from occupied ga
"Then you're accepting socialism."

No, I'm accepting efficiency. By your construct, I accepted socialism when I accepted that my money is going to be spent on the kid at the ER. And, if I understood you correctly, so did you.

Or are you saying that it is 'socialism' to spend $50 of your tax money on preventive care, but it is not 'socialism' to spend $500 of your money on emergency care? If that is what you are saying, I'd really like to hear how you differentiate the two.

51 posted on 07/15/2005 9:40:57 AM PDT by lugsoul ("She talks and she laughs." - Tom DeLay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
By your construct, I accepted socialism when I accepted that my money is going to be spent on the kid at the ER. And, if I understood you correctly, so did you.

It depends on whose money. If it's government money plundered from the taxpayer it's socialism. The kid going to the ER is paid for by the customers and stockholders of the hospital, not the taxpayers.

"Efficiency" is used to cover a lot of evils. I'm saying that spending $50 of the taxpayer's money on your straw man (the sick kid) only is efficient if you accept the socialistic premise that his health is the responsibility of the taxpayers anyway and it will cost the taxpayers $500 later on. If it costs his parents $500 then not spending the $50 isn't a problem for me. That is what parents are for, not to just squirt out children, but to take care of them as well.

Health care is a commodity, and if a sick person can't pay for health care, then look to private charity, but don't plunder what I worked for to pay for it. It isn't any different than any other commodity. You're distorting the whole argument by the handwringing emotional example of the "sick kid." What about the sick junkie who has abscesses from using dirty needles. I guarantee that one hell of a lot more ER admissions who can't or won't pay are from deadbeats who due to their lifestyles and stubborn persistence in poor life choices have health problems (abscesses, hep c etc.) and no money (all spent on dope or booze) than the hypothetical sick child.

52 posted on 07/15/2005 10:00:22 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
"The kid going to the ER is paid for by the customers and stockholders of the hospital, not the taxpayers."

That's your fallacy. The only ER's that have to provide indigent care are those that are publicly funded.

"You're distorting the whole argument by the handwringing emotional example of the "sick kid." What about the sick junkie who has abscesses from using dirty needles."

Did you choose not to read where I addressed this distinction in my original post to you on this topic? Or are you just choosing to ignore it now?

53 posted on 07/15/2005 10:26:55 AM PDT by lugsoul ("She talks and she laughs." - Tom DeLay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
Just proving once again that there's not a dime's worth of difference between the two halves of the redemopublicrat superparty.

Enough small government single issue voters are going to jump ship in 2008 to sink the GOP in many races. And it will be the fault of the neocons.
54 posted on 07/15/2005 10:29:29 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lugsoul
The only ER's that have to provide indigent care are those that are publicly funded.

Not true. All have to provide emergency care

Did you choose not to read where I addressed this distinction in my original post to you on this topic? Or are you just choosing to ignore it now?

All I remember your saying on this is that we are going to have to accept indigent care.

55 posted on 07/15/2005 10:31:50 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
Enough small government single issue voters are going to jump ship in 2008 to sink the GOP in many races. And it will be the fault of the neocons

I'm not a single issue voter, and I'll probably vote libertarian. It's just that on all my issues there is not very much difference between the pubs and the dems. Gun control, government spending, illegal immigration - I don't see the pubs doing much conservative on these fronts.

56 posted on 07/15/2005 10:35:07 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
outlining a proposed $1 billion budget increase for next year that will put bulldozers to work on school, road and port construction projects across the state.

Translation: keeping corporations happy with taxpayer dollars.

57 posted on 07/15/2005 10:36:52 AM PDT by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
That's because neocons have taken over. Neocons want to spend like dems, but they say socially conservative things to keep the base happy. And they are pro-authoritarian statism.

I got neo-conned into voting Republican in 2000 because I believed the hype.
58 posted on 07/15/2005 10:40:12 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
That's because neocons have taken over. Neocons want to spend like dems, but they say socially conservative things to keep the base happy. And they are pro-authoritarian statism.

PRAVDA TOVARSCH! They've taken over these forums too in case you hadn't noticed.

59 posted on 07/18/2005 3:33:03 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga
It's just that on all my issues there is not very much difference between the pubs and the dems. Gun control, government spending, illegal immigration - I don't see the pubs doing much conservative on these fronts.

Sadly, I agree with you. I voted for Sonny as a protest vote- never thinking he had a prayer of unseating a sitting Governor- but obviously, Barnes had offended enough voting blocks to get the boot, despite all the influence-peddling he indulged in. The joke down here- six hours away from the fever swamps of Hot-lanta, was "Roy Barnes? Why, he's the best Governor money can buy..."

While not as blatantly corrupt, Sonny seems to have no problem spending everybody else's money. My tagline is from a true story--

60 posted on 07/18/2005 3:41:59 AM PDT by backhoe ("It's so easy to spend someone else's money." [My Dad, circa 1958])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: backhoe

In his early political career Barnes wasn't a total jerk. He just decided that it was to his best personal advantage to become one, and worked overtime to be exactly what the black democrats and the Urinal/Constipation wanted as the ideal politician.


61 posted on 07/18/2005 4:48:39 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-61 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson