LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 227
0 members and 227 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 04:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 01-10-2011, 02:39 PM   #11
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 26,231
Re: Election 2010: Teabaggin' the Ds & Rs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder View Post
That plan is a fiscal disaster.
A plan that likely costs more isn't?

A plan that was focused on cost-cutting before expansion wasn't a preferable idea? Ty's right - the Dems demanded expansion as a concession to do the cost-cutting. That was a political reality. But that doesn't mean it was a wise economic compromise.

I am unaware of any business that takes on non-revenue producing costs as part of a plan to improve its solvency. Might I be surprised that Obamacare does this? Yes. And that would be delightful. Might you be shocked in ten years to discover the plan has been an economic disaster? Yes.

Only difference in those two scenarios is we can't afford your faith being unfounded. And we could have avoided that risk. But we didn't.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
sebastian_dangerfield is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:34 PM.