• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

The Neo-Con plan to bankrupt America to end government spending, entitlements, the welfare state etc....

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

xenolith

Golden Member
Aug 3, 2000
1,588
0
76
Originally posted by: techs

When 60 percent of people have no health care, and can't afford it, they will not think the problem is too much government spending. They will turn to the government for health care.
60% of what people? Americans? Where the heck did you get that statistic? That's 180 million Americans. :confused:

According to the NCHC, the figure is 16 percent (or 47 million) of Americans are uninsured. And 40 percent of those uninsured reside in households that earn more than $50,000, so 19 million Americans can afford it but choose not to purchase health insurance. Also, 20% of the 47 million uninsured (9 million) are illegal aliens. And I won't even calculate the 30% of the 47 million uninsured that are from the invincible 18 to 24 year old age group that again choose not to purchase health insurance.

So in actuality, it's more like 6% of Americans that are uninsured because they can't afford it. Ohh the injustice...
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,086
493
126
Better to remain silent and have people think you are a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it.

 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,034
1
61
Originally posted by: Nebor
Can we have a vote to restrict apoppin to the PC Gaming forum? :p

I think he's really Bill Cosby and types with his Mortimer Icobod marker.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,902
0
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Nebor
I hate your posting style. It's like a squirrel with ADD learned to type. It makes me want to jab forks in my eyes. I'd sooner read posts written in all caps.
i love you too
:heart:


AT LEAST I HAVE A "STYLE" [you are a silly sheepie too :p]

. . . and ..

.. GOOD -DO IT!!
- i guess i can now legitimately say "go fork yourself" :Q
:laugh:

{MY PLAN IS WORKING!}
:evil:

EVERYONE HERE WILL LOVE ME; YOU ARE ALREADY BLIND ANYWAY AND MOST OF YOUR POSTS ARE ANGRY ILL-THOUGHT-OUT RIDICULE :p
:roll:

==================
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Nebor
Can we have a vote to restrict apoppin to the PC Gaming forum? :p

I think he's really Bill Cosby and types with his Mortimer Icobod marker.
Like Bill Cosby i am at least intelligent and have something to say and i don't have to reduce myself to an angry moronic apelike level that cannot even comprehend what someone is saying -- so they throw bananas and their own sh!t instead as they cover themselves with excrement in their silly stinky attempts - angry ridiculer apes - go grab a crude club and try to gang up; you will fail as always as the intellect is missing.

this thread is flame bait anyway

Do you really want pearls of wisdom for monkeys? .. in this thread?




60% of what people? Americans? Where the heck did you get that statistic? That's 180 million Americans.
Like MOST of what is posted here - most statistics are pulled out of the arse of the poster; this one can be justified by "under"-insured
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,902
0
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: bamacre
apoppin, it was a joke.
Mine was too .. just a bigger joke
-it's like for like .. with a nasty P&N twist :)
[ i just want to "fit in" again]



i really love you guys
[and especially girls, :heart:]

some of you may even get used to me
- i am in exile from Video
[self-imposed - or else!!]
:shocked:

i know Nebor .. he is .. well ..
My neighbor here and in video for 4 years; we have some basic disagreements with "life" .. and it is all in 'fun' - from me anyway
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,969
3,757
126
a: Please, do not include me in your *us* nonsense
- I resent it

M: I call um like I see um. I did my best to be honest in my search and the price was everything I held sacred. Forgive me if now I don't worry too much about what you resent.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
29,991
3,485
126
Originally posted by: techs
I wonder why the Neo-Cons and thier Republican lackeys believe that by spending wildly they will bring on an economic crisis that will REDUCE governments role in the economy and that people will change their attitudes about the governments role in helping individuals?
As so many others have said, you're completely wrong. Neocons are pro government types. They are no less my nemesis than your socialist type.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
48,103
8,537
126
"Starving the beast" is a myth. Neocons are strongly in favor of big federal government. The idea of starving the beast is a bit of Orwellianism that comes about through their agenda of raiding state and local -earmarked funds for their pet federal programs. This "robbing Peter to pay Paul" tactic gives the Republicans the illusion of being "small government" proponents at the local levels, while making it possible for them to stick the "tax and spend liberal" label on the Democrats.
 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,902
0
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
a: Please, do not include me in your *us* nonsense
- I resent it

M: I call um like I see um. I did my best to be honest in my search and the price was everything I held sacred. Forgive me if now I don't worry too much about what you resent.
so do i



you best may have just not been good enough

You are forgiven ...
-thanks for asking the right person, this time

. .. . and please, forgive me for also being 'intense' toward you
- i say things hastily that perhaps i should also consider your feelings
-- sorry

we understand each other now, i think ... and anything further now may be meaningless gestures and repetition
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,584
345
126
Originally posted by: xenolith
Originally posted by: techs

When 60 percent of people have no health care, and can't afford it, they will not think the problem is too much government spending. They will turn to the government for health care.
60% of what people? Americans? Where the heck did you get that statistic? That's 180 million Americans. :confused:

According to the NCHC, the figure is 16 percent (or 47 million) of Americans are uninsured. And 40 percent of those uninsured reside in households that earn more than $50,000, so 19 million Americans can afford it but choose not to purchase health insurance. Also, 20% of the 47 million uninsured (9 million) are illegal aliens. And I won't even calculate the 30% of the 47 million uninsured that are from the invincible 18 to 24 year old age group that again choose not to purchase health insurance.

So in actuality, it's more like 6% of Americans that are uninsured because they can't afford it. Ohh the injustice...
You appear to have missed where he said *When* - the thread is about the idea of a gloomy picture as the right drastically cuts social spending and such.

The discussion is about whether that will lead to the public embracing small government, or a backlash for government to do more. You missed his point being in that context.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,969
3,757
126
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
a: Please, do not include me in your *us* nonsense
- I resent it

M: I call um like I see um. I did my best to be honest in my search and the price was everything I held sacred. Forgive me if now I don't worry too much about what you resent.
so do i



you best may have just not been good enough

You are forgiven ...
-thanks for asking the right person, this time

. .. . and please, forgive me for also being 'intense' toward you
- i say things hastily that perhaps i should also consider your feelings
-- sorry

we understand each other now, i think ... and anything further now may be meaningless gestures and repetition
You should not consider my feelings because my feelings are not your projection of what you think they are. All the confusion in the world arises from people who consider. I don't think you understand me at all, but that's all ok. I don't worry about your haste or your disappointment or any other of your reactions. I just can't make any sense out of much of what you say. If I say over and over I don't get your style and you continue on with it, what's the point? I do not understand you so anything further isn't something I have an attitude about. So far I don't get what you mean and believe it's because you don't get what I mean either even though I said what I say I lay out slowly and over time in ways I hope to be appropriate to a thread. Tomorrow, who knows.

Of course my best may not be good enough. But why would I look to you to tell me? Why would you be in a better position to say? And how could my best be better than it is?

And what does 'thanks for asking the right person this time' mean? Do you see that what you mean is not there in what you say? Was I supposed to say, You are welcome? I don't think so. It was some sort of shot at something that's gone before would be my guess.

It seems like you talk to yourself and think you're talking to me. What's wrong with English and being simple?

If how you want to communicate is how you want to do it, that's fine too, but I can't play. I'm only going to ask so many times to understand.

 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,902
0
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
a: Please, do not include me in your *us* nonsense
- I resent it

M: I call um like I see um. I did my best to be honest in my search and the price was everything I held sacred. Forgive me if now I don't worry too much about what you resent.
so do i



you best may have just not been good enough

You are forgiven ...
-thanks for asking the right person, this time

. .. . and please, forgive me for also being 'intense' toward you
- i say things hastily that perhaps i should also consider your feelings
-- sorry

we understand each other now, i think ... and anything further now may be meaningless gestures and repetition
You should not consider my feelings because my feelings are not your projection of what you think they are. All the confusion in the world arises from people who consider. I don't think you understand me at all, but that's all ok. I don't worry about your haste or your disappointment or any other of your reactions. I just can't make any sense out of much of what you say. If I say over and over I don't get your style and you continue on with it, what's the point? I do not understand you so anything further isn't something I have an attitude about. So far I don't get what you mean and believe it's because you don't get what I mean either even though I said what I say I lay out slowly and over time in ways I hope to be appropriate to a thread. Tomorrow, who knows.

Of course my best may not be good enough. But why would I look to you to tell me? Why would you be in a better position to say? And how could my best be better than it is?

And what does 'thanks for asking the right person this time' mean? Do you see that what you mean is not there in what you say? Was I supposed to say, You are welcome? I don't think so. It was some sort of shot at something that's gone before would be my guess.

It seems like you talk to yourself and think you're talking to me. What's wrong with English and being simple?

If how you want to communicate is how you want to do it, that's fine too, but I can't play. I'm only going to ask so many times to understand.
what do you want to hear? that your god is completely insane, you are a hypocrite full of crap, you have ZERO clue about what you are blabbing, there is no salvation in jesus and your religion is the CAUSE of everything wrong with the world and even the universe
- was that it?

OK ?

you got it now - any more direct and i might be considered rude by believers



clear enough for you
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,887
4,842
126
Neocons are not for starving the beast, they are simply for shifting the burden to the middle and working classes. And since they can't do directly at the polls, they have figured out a way to do it by borrowing money instead of collecting taxes from the wealthy.
When they borrow money and put it into the money supply, they are basically imposing a consumption tax on all purchases through increased inflation, thus getting through the back door what they can't get through the front door, a regressive consumption tax.
It is no coincidence that they have been borrowing and spending like crazy since Reagan, it's the plan.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,661
755
126
Originally posted by: senseamp
Neocons are not for starving the beast, they are simply for shifting the burden to the middle and working classes.
Nothing wrong with that, since they are the majority and benefit the most from government services.

Originally posted by: senseamp
And since they can't do directly at the polls, they have figured out a way to do it by borrowing money instead of collecting taxes from the wealthy.
Who pay more than their fair share to begin with. Good.

Originally posted by: senseamp
When they borrow money and put it into the money supply, they are basically imposing a consumption tax on all purchases through increased inflation, thus getting through the back door what they can't get through the front door, a regressive consumption tax.
Yep.
Originally posted by: senseamp
It is no coincidence that they have been borrowing and spending like crazy since Reagan, it's the plan.

And a good plan it is. Middle class has it easy. And that includes myself. If I can learn to live on 60% of my income (which I do) anyone can. And my household of 2 earns less than 70k/year in the 5th largest city in the nation. So Im not rich.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,586
11
76

When 60 percent of people have no health care, and can't afford it, they will not think the problem is too much government spending. They will turn to the government for health care. And say goodbye to aircraft carriers, etc. The Neo-Cons will bring on the things they claim to hate most.


I think it takes a very weak, lazy, waste of a person to want something, and instead of working hard to get it themselves, turning to the government to get it. That's not how America is supposed to be. To quote a real liberal, "Ask not what your country can do for you..."
 

m1ldslide1

Platinum Member
Feb 20, 2006
2,322
0
0
Originally posted by: Nebor
I hate your posting style. It's like a squirrel with ADD learned to type. It makes me want to jab forks in my eyes. I'd sooner read posts written in all caps.
I had to plug my nose to keep from busting up laughing over this. Quiet day at the office...
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,887
4,842
126
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: senseamp
Neocons are not for starving the beast, they are simply for shifting the burden to the middle and working classes.
Nothing wrong with that, since they are the majority and benefit the most from government services.

Originally posted by: senseamp
And since they can't do directly at the polls, they have figured out a way to do it by borrowing money instead of collecting taxes from the wealthy.
Who pay more than their fair share to begin with. Good.

Originally posted by: senseamp
When they borrow money and put it into the money supply, they are basically imposing a consumption tax on all purchases through increased inflation, thus getting through the back door what they can't get through the front door, a regressive consumption tax.
Yep.
Originally posted by: senseamp
It is no coincidence that they have been borrowing and spending like crazy since Reagan, it's the plan.

And a good plan it is. Middle class has it easy. And that includes myself. If I can learn to live on 60% of my income (which I do) anyone can. And my household of 2 earns less than 70k/year in the 5th largest city in the nation. So Im not rich.
So you are for printing money to finance government spending instead of collecting taxes to do so?
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,661
755
126
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: senseamp
Neocons are not for starving the beast, they are simply for shifting the burden to the middle and working classes.
Nothing wrong with that, since they are the majority and benefit the most from government services.

Originally posted by: senseamp
And since they can't do directly at the polls, they have figured out a way to do it by borrowing money instead of collecting taxes from the wealthy.
Who pay more than their fair share to begin with. Good.

Originally posted by: senseamp
When they borrow money and put it into the money supply, they are basically imposing a consumption tax on all purchases through increased inflation, thus getting through the back door what they can't get through the front door, a regressive consumption tax.
Yep.
Originally posted by: senseamp
It is no coincidence that they have been borrowing and spending like crazy since Reagan, it's the plan.

And a good plan it is. Middle class has it easy. And that includes myself. If I can learn to live on 60% of my income (which I do) anyone can. And my household of 2 earns less than 70k/year in the 5th largest city in the nation. So Im not rich.
So you are for printing money to finance government spending instead of collecting taxes to do so?
If the taxes arent raised for the rich ONLY, then its fair. It will never happen but I wish we had a flat tax. THAT is fair. The rich carry more their fair share in this country, and the reasoning of "they can afford it" is not only class envy but just plain bullshit.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,887
4,842
126
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: blackangst1
Originally posted by: senseamp
Neocons are not for starving the beast, they are simply for shifting the burden to the middle and working classes.
Nothing wrong with that, since they are the majority and benefit the most from government services.

Originally posted by: senseamp
And since they can't do directly at the polls, they have figured out a way to do it by borrowing money instead of collecting taxes from the wealthy.
Who pay more than their fair share to begin with. Good.

Originally posted by: senseamp
When they borrow money and put it into the money supply, they are basically imposing a consumption tax on all purchases through increased inflation, thus getting through the back door what they can't get through the front door, a regressive consumption tax.
Yep.
Originally posted by: senseamp
It is no coincidence that they have been borrowing and spending like crazy since Reagan, it's the plan.

And a good plan it is. Middle class has it easy. And that includes myself. If I can learn to live on 60% of my income (which I do) anyone can. And my household of 2 earns less than 70k/year in the 5th largest city in the nation. So Im not rich.
So you are for printing money to finance government spending instead of collecting taxes to do so?
If the taxes arent raised for the rich ONLY, then its fair. It will never happen but I wish we had a flat tax. THAT is fair. The rich carry more their fair share in this country, and the reasoning of "they can afford it" is not only class envy but just plain bullshit.
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,034
1
61
Originally posted by: senseamp
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
I agree.

And are the Democrats gonna run on "We want to offer more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place?"
 

m1ldslide1

Platinum Member
Feb 20, 2006
2,322
0
0
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: senseamp
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
I agree.

And are the Democrats gonna run on "We want to offer more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place?"
What an election year it would be! Finally we would have some honesty from both sides. I think there would be a *chance* at a successful 3rd party candidate at that point.
 

AAjax

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2001
3,798
0
0
Awww shucks your half right, it is a rather large conspiracy to bankrupt the nation. But get this, both of your precious parties are in on it. Shhhhhh its a secret.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,887
4,842
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: senseamp
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
I agree.

And are the Democrats gonna run on "We want to offer more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place?"
Like the Medicare prescription drug benefit? Oh wait, that was the GOP and your pal W.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,034
1
61
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: senseamp
Good, then the Republicans should run on the "We'll tax you through inflation so we can cut taxes on the rich" platform. If it's such a great idea, I am sure it will be an overwhelming success at the polls.
I agree.

And are the Democrats gonna run on "We want to offer more social programs even though we can't afford the social programs already in place?"
Like the Medicare prescription drug benefit? Oh wait, that was the GOP and your pal W.
My pal, W? :laugh:

OMG, that's just hilarious. :laugh:
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY