You (all) lie!

[sebastian_dangerfield]

I think I was with you two that I was discussing fears regarding (a) this country's production of next to nothing, (b) it's short-termism driven by investors, and (c) consumption remaining flat or decreasing slowly for the next several years, leaving us with economic stagnation.

Anyway, here's a decent article providing an overview of some of issues vexing the labor market. It's broad, but the writer makes a decent attempt at linking short-termism, technology, globalism, etc... and addressing how they in concert savage our labor force, which tanks our economy: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/21/bu...agewanted=2&em

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

Well, there isn't much to go on in that article, but let's say in 2007 a D congressman wrote up a plan to balance the budget thta called for the abolition of the U.S. armed forces, the complete opening of U.S. borders and an end to federal law enforcement. Would you have viewed this as a serious attempt at bipartisanship that the Bush administration should be expected to take seriously?

"Radically restricting" social security and medicare is a totaly non-starter in Washington, with every Dem and half the Rs.

ETA: Here's the plan. Based on the executive summary, it seems to propose the complete elimination for social security and medicare for those under 55, a massive tax cut for the rich (i.e. flat tax), a massive tax cut for corporations. This isn't so much a plan as a definition of conservative world view.

I've never been comfortable with the way SS benefits are given to the young and disabled. The concept doesn't offend me. In fact, it's a laudable idea. But if you've ever done any personal injury work, you've probably seen some really offensive instances in which people with subtle injuries have gotten themselves on lifetime benefits. You can get yourself on SS permanent disability for simply having an extreme bipolar condition.

Of all the things we fail to address in this country, "compensation culture" as it's known in Europe, is one of the biggest cancers on our national character and pocketbook.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

I don't thinK I have ever said what health care reform should look like.

But the official republican plan, which Ryan's most definitely isn't,

i was trying to show generally how a minority party's plans are treated to suggest why they might quit trying. I have never read Ryan's plan, or the Rs hC plan. my entire investment is reading the interview.

[PresentTense Pirate Penske]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You can get yourself on SS permanent disability for simply having an extreme bipolar condition.
.

For real? How do the regs define "extreme"?

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

i was trying to show generally how a minority party's plans are treated to suggest why they might quit trying. I have never read Ryan's plan, or the Rs hC plan. my entire investment is reading the interview.

Me, too. Did you realize the Jews have like 2,000 grandchildren each? They're crazy prolific.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

Me, too. Did you realize the Jews have like 2,000 grandchildren each? They're crazy prolific.

I know dtb is working toward this number - she's a Jewess, right?

[PresentTense Pirate Penske]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I think I was with you two that I was discussing fears regarding (a) this country's production of next to nothing, (b) it's short-termism driven by investors, and (c) consumption remaining flat or decreasing slowly for the next several years, leaving us with economic stagnation.

Anyway, here's a decent article providing an overview of some of issues vexing the labor market. It's broad, but the writer makes a decent attempt at linking short-termism, technology, globalism, etc... and addressing how they in concert savage our labor force, which tanks our economy: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/21/bu...agewanted=2&em

[QUOTE]she responds to online ads, only to learn they are seeking operators for telephone sex lines /QUOTE]

That's not bad-its like getting paid for trolling the craig's list casual encounters, something I do now for free. Plus I consider any type of workplace sex a major perk, iykwimaityadetkts.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

i was trying to show generally how a minority party's plans are treated to suggest why they might quit trying.

Understood, but your point is undermined because your example is one somewhat kooky guy's proposal that not even his part-mates endorse. It therefore says almost nothing about how the minority party's plans are treated.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Adder

Well, there isn't much to go on in that article, but let's say in 2007 a D congressman wrote up a plan to balance the budget thta called for the abolition of the U.S. armed forces, the complete opening of U.S. borders and an end to federal law enforcement. Would you have viewed this as a serious attempt at bipartisanship that the Bush administration should be expected to take seriously?

"Radically restricting" social security and medicare is a totaly non-starter in Washington, with every Dem and half the Rs.

ETA: Here's the plan. Based on the executive summary, it seems to propose the complete elimination for social security and medicare for those under 55, a massive tax cut for the rich (i.e. flat tax), a massive tax cut for corporations. This isn't so much a plan as a definition of conservative world view.

He won't even ask the CBO to score his tax plan. Instead he asks them to asssume it works.

Hank, don't get me wrong -- I'm grateful for this plan, because it helps to see what the choices are.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

Understood, but your point is undermined because your example is one somewhat kooky guy's proposal that not even his part-mates endorse. It therefore says almost nothing about how the minority party's plans are treated.

so obama was fucking with him, and us, when he said it was a serious idea?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

he asks them to asssume it works.

sounds like a health care plan I've heard about

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

sounds like a health care plan I've heard about

Not as it was put to the CBO.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Not as it was put to the CBO.

careful. when you start arguing acronyms and HC with me you usually smack down on your face.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

careful. when you start arguing acronyms and HC with me you usually smack down on your face.

Ryan asked the CBO to score the expense side of his proposal, but not the revenue side. He asked the CBO simply to assume that the revenue side would generate 19% of GDP in taxes. So they did. But some of the journalists covering the story missed that.

Democrats did not do this when they asked the CBO to score the healthcare proposals.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Ryan asked the CBO to score the expense side of his proposal, but not the revenue side. He asked the CBO simply to assume that the revenue side would generate 19% of GDP in taxes. So they did. But some of the journalists covering the story missed that.

Democrats did not do this when they asked the CBO to score the healthcare proposals.

I understood that. I wasn't comparing apples to apples, I was saying the Rs grow fruit too.