Bailout Alternative???

[jpp]

The odd thing here is, both number6 and macville come from states which are heavily dependent on Federal subsidies -- they get back far more in Federal money than they pay in taxes.

So number6 and macville are, in fact, welfare recipients. And big ones: this has been going on for 80 years.

How can you guys endure this state of perpetual welfare dependency? The damage to your characters and sense of self-worth must be incalculable -- entire regions of the country and whole peoples pauperized by Federal hand-outs.

If you guys really believe your rhetoric, why aren't you demanding to pay more federal tax, so liberal, blue-state America doesn't have to carry you forever? Don't you want to be saved?

 

[Joseph Ward]

If anyone hasn't seen Aaron Russo's AMERICA: FREEDOM TO FASCISM maybe this can help explain some things related to the bailout?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ueEfRXZCVA

 

[number6]

The odd thing here is, both number6 and macville come from states which are heavily dependent on Federal subsidies -- they get back far more in Federal money than they pay in taxes.

So number6 and macville are, in fact, welfare recipients. And big ones: this has been going on for 80 years.

How can you endure this state of perpetual welfare dependency? The damage to your characters and sense of self-worth must be incalculable -- entire regions of the country and whole peoples pauperized by Federal hand-outs.

If you guys really believe your rhetoric, why aren't you demanding to pay more federal tax, so liberal, blue-state America doesn't have to carry your posteriors forever? Don't you want to be saved?

Don't know where you get your info, but watch it! or we'll shut off your gasoline supply

But let me tell a tale of two Hurricanes to make my point. Hurricane Katrina hit good ol' Laissez Les Bon Temps Roulez! Nue O'leans and the nation was transfixed for weeks and NBC would come back for a week every year to plead for more money for those poe' poe' NuO'lineans.

Hurricane Ike levels Galveston and floods something like 100,000 homes in Houston and leaves MILLIONS without power for a long, long time. A week and a half after the devestation, NBC finally went to Houston, and being unable to find anyone cryin' "poor, poor, pitiful me", spent most of the program talking about the credit crisis on Wall Street, and then promptly went back where they could find someone asking for a handout.

JPP, Toss all that mud you want, but it just don't stick doun here.

 

[jpp]

JPP, Toss all that mud you want, but it just don't stick doun here.

"Mud" is a funny way to refer to "facts". But as a former red stater myself (and with family still in Texas), I know full well that facts don't stick in that part of the world, either. It must be the fault of all those corrosive Federal subsidies, diminishing cognitive function.

 

[number6]

"Mud" is a funny way to refer to "facts". But as a former red stater myself (and with family still in Texas), I know full well that facts don't stick in that part of the world, either. It must be the fault of all those Federal subsidies. Very bad for you.

I really am unfamiliar with what Federal Subsidies you are talking about. Is this some secret information you have that you cannot reveal? I've racked my brain trying to think of any Federal money I personally am getting and can't think of a thing. I thought maybe you were talking about milk subsidies, but I don't buy or drink milk. Or maybe grain subsidies but I only eat WASA Light Rye Crispbreads and since they are a brand originated in Sweden, could actually be imported from there.

Windpouer is being subsidized but we are going to export that, along with our vast petroleum products, to the rest of the country so you couldn't call that a Texas subsidy. It's just keeping the rest of the country supplied with cheaper energy.

You're gonna have to help me out here. What subsidies do we get that are exclusive to this state. You've piqued my curiosity.

 

[Steven M. Bailey]

Hey Steve.
Yes, you`re probably right...initially it was not my intention to be political and dead serious at this place. I think I`ll take good ol` "Gunther von Hagen" down as long as I contribute to this thread...

BTW, really sorry to hear about your situation.

I googled Gunther von Hagen and found that you can learn something even from a goofy avitar. My post about your avitar was more a point of levity. That look on his face is priceless an I had no idea that he is a serious figure. That makes the expression on his face all the better.

I think some of us get too serious about politics and forget that we have a common interest in more creative endeavors. Now that the "walleyed" Doctor is down I KINDA miss him.

As far as the other goes, things will work out they always do. You have to work pretty hard to starve around here. I appreciate the concern.

 

[Priyesh P.]

I googled Gunther von Hagen and found that you can learn something even from a goofy avitar. My post about your avitar was more a point of levity. That look on his face is priceless an I had no idea that he is a serious figure. That makes the expression on his face all the better.

I think some of us get too serious about politics and forget that we have a common interest in more creative endeavors. Now that the "walleyed" Doctor is down I KINDA miss him.

As far as the other goes, things will work out they always do. You have to work pretty hard to starve around here. I appreciate the concern.

Gunther will be back soon, he just took a timeout to his home-planet ;-)
But I think he`s one of the strangest figures around here in Germany (that hat is priceless). My brother did the walleye look in photoshop after some rounds of teasing with stupid e-mails containing even more stupid images.
And btw, Gunther has an avidity for corpses that makes one shiver...

But again, you`re right, there`s no sense to take all this too seriously, after all we`re just little fishes, like we say in Germany...

 

[jpp]

I really am unfamiliar with what Federal Subsidies you are talking about..... You're gonna have to help me out here. What subsidies do we get that are exclusive to this state. You've piqued my curiosity.

It sounds like too many years of welfare have robbed you of initiative. The subsidies aren't exclusive to Texas, Texas just gets more them. To take the most glaring example, Texas is No. 1 in farm subsidies, which amounts to billions. The same occurs in a host of other industries, in addition to infrastructure subsidies, thanks to the power of your Congressional delegation and certain presidents (though the subsidies long preceded GWB).

There's a simple way to do this: examine the Federal money which flows into the state, and compare it to what goes out of the state in tax revenue. You'll see that Texas is a welfare basket state.

Windpouer is being subsidized but we are going to export that, along with our vast petroleum products, to the rest of the country so you couldn't call that a Texas subsidy. It's just keeping the rest of the country supplied with cheaper energy.

Unless you're talking about the Socialist State of Texas, the energy will be privately owned and sold at market prices, same as if it came from Saudi Arabia or Venezuela. Beyond any local or state tax revenues energy production may generate, the revenues won't be shared with the State of Texas or the people of Texas, and won't pay for the services and subsidies currently bankrolled by the Feds. Private energy production has nothing to do with what the state gets from the Feds.

 

[Joel Kaye]

There's a simple way to do this: examine the Federal money which flows into the state, and compare it to what goes out of the state in tax revenue.

Can you get that info from a bumper sticker? 'Cause that's all the info about 3/4 of our population can digest at any one time.

For instance, last time I looked the U.S. is EXPORTING more oil than ever and domestic oil demand is down year over year and drilling more now will result in a 5 cent per gallon decrease in gas prices in 10 years. But that doesn't fit on a bumper sticker either.

Drill Baby Drill does though.

 

[Steven M. Bailey]

It sounds like too many years of welfare have robbed you of initiative. The subsidies aren't exclusive to Texas, Texas just gets more them. To take the most glaring example, Texas is No. 1 in farm subsidies, which amounts to billions. The same occurs in a host of other industries, in addition to infrastructure subsidies, thanks to the power of your Congressional delegation and certain presidents (though the subsidies long preceded GWB).

Farm subsidies result in lower prices at the grocery store for everybody making us all Dependant on welfare of sorts. If we had to pay full price for food we'd be pretty unhappy.

I grow a lot of my own food so most years My dependence on the state is less. This year the orchard took a late freeze and all of our fruit was destroyed. I guess (according to your thinking)that makes me welfare trash. Except for the fact that I get a lot of my produce from local, non subsidized, organic farms.

9X% of Americans live on 2% of the land. Its no wonder we're all on welfare.

 

[number6]

It sounds like too many years of welfare have robbed you of initiative. The subsidies aren't exclusive to Texas, Texas just gets more them. To take the most glaring example, Texas is No. 1 in farm subsidies, which amounts to billions. The same occurs in a host of other industries, in addition to infrastructure subsidies, thanks to the power of your Congressional delegation and certain presidents (though the subsidies long preceded GWB).

There's a simple way to do this: examine the Federal money which flows into the state, and compare it to what goes out of the state in tax revenue. You'll see that Texas is a welfare basket state.



Unless you're talking about the Socialist State of Texas, the energy will be private owned and sold at market prices, same as if it came from Saudi Arabia or Venezuela. Beyond any local or state tax revenues energy production may generate, the revenues won't be shared with the State of Texas or the people of Texas, and won't pay for the services and subsidies currently bankrolled by the Feds. Private energy production has nothing to do with what the state gets from the Feds.

Thought you might have trouble backing up your claims, and I was right. Farm subsidies? Iowa, Nebraska, New York, California...ALL 50 STATES! And who benefits? ALL 300 MILLION AMERICANS!

Energy? Same thing whether it applies to coal, nuclear, oil shale, solar, wind, geothermal, tide, etc.

Infrastructure? Federal Highways need repair so the goods can get from the Houston Ship Channel to all points in the lower 48. Plus, they make a nice conduit for goods to get from the east coast to the west coast and vice versa. There was some talk about building a toll road across most of the state paid for by the State so we could charge all that traffic passing through. Not sure but I think we decided to give the rest of you a break and continue letting you pass for free.

As for getting more subsidies than other states, well I guess when you go to comparing Texas's to Delawares, you have inequities. Same with comparing Californias to Rhode Islands. But at the same time, you have to balance that inequity with what a state like Texas or California supplies to the rest of the nation. In California's case...Yummie food! (Love their avocados!)

Trust me on this jpp, if Texas were to secede from the Union (and legally I think there is a provision for that) you would miss us MUCH more than we would miss you.

afterthought: Not sure if there is a provision for secession or just to split into 5 separate states, but the original point still stands.

 

[Joel Kaye]

And who benefits? ALL 300 MILLION AMERICANS!

So... you're a socialist now too? So now you're defending redistribution of wealth?

You think there should be FEDERAL highways? You know they were created as a federal works program by that liberal Franklin Roosevelt. That's socialism. Does anyone think the government (that can't do anything right) should hand the Fire Department over to Halliburton?

 

[Matthew Rogers]

Does anyone think the government (that can't do anything right) should hand the Fire Department over to Halliburton?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your comment, but our Fire and Ambulances here are actually privatized. You can either pay per trip or you can pay a yearly premium. It actually works much better (and faster) than the surrounding counties that have government based Fire/Ambulances.

I actually know that the government can do very little right (in it's current state.) I filled out some tax form for my business this year that had us pay less in tax than it probably cost them to send it out when you figure in paying someone to process it and mail it.

Matthew

 

[number6]

So... you're a socialist now too? So now you're defending redistribution of wealth?

You think there should be FEDERAL highways? You know they were created as a federal works program by that liberal Franklin Roosevelt. That's socialism. Does anyone think the government (that can't do anything right) should hand the Fire Department over to Halliburton?

Joel, you slugabed... have some coffee and wake up. You're rambling.

Socialist? I don't know. I don't have a slot. I just try to be practical. But to answer your point, I was talking about redistributing GOODS.

Yes, I guess socialism is creeping in more and more. But you know, as long as my life is free, relatively speaking, and I have choices, then I don't care what you call it.

 

[jpp]

Thought you might have trouble backing up your claims, and I was right. Farm subsidies? Iowa, Nebraska, New York, California...ALL 50 STATES! And who benefits? ALL 300 MILLION AMERICANS!

Huh? Wasn't the discussion about "welfare"? Meaning states, like Texas, which get back far more than they put in, at the expense of other people in other states? Remember the "bridge to nowhere"? Like a lot of Alaskans, you Texans love your welfare. You just don't want it called welfare.

'Who benefits"? In your case, private interests in Texas, primarily. But as Joelnet notes, sounds like you're turning into a socialist, if you're now invoking the supposed well-being of 300 million Americans to justify outsized Federal subsidies to red states, which in turn elect politicians who routinely denounce -- socialism?

 

[Joel Kaye]

but our Fire a

Your fire department is private? What, you pay per per fire? Paramedics provide for emergencies here and privately owned ambulances transport people. Though I don't think they work any more efficiently than if the Fire Dept were to operate ambulances as well.

Certainly your police dept isn't private too.

I don't mind the free enterprise system. It's just that our system has been corrupted to favor the very wealthy. If you can't see it right now before your eyes with this bailout then nothing will convince you of that. Reaganomics has favored the very wealthy by letting them regulate themselves without real oversight. And both Dems and Repubs are complicit.

 

[number6]

Huh? Wasn't the discussion about "welfare"? Meaning states, like Texas, which get back far more than they put in, at the expense of other people in other states? Remember the "bridge to nowhere"? Like a lot of Alaskans, you Texans love your welfare. You just don't want it called welfare.

'Who benefits"? In your case, private interests in Texas, primarily. But as Joelnet notes, sounds like you're turning into a socialist, if you're now invoking the supposed well-being of 300 million Americans to justify outsized Federal subsidies to red states.

Again with the irresponsible use of the welfare word...

Granted, this isn't the LA Times (more like the New York Times:usd: ) and while we are not real journalists, I think we should try and at least attempt to play-a-journalist-on-the-Internet while making these posts.

Instead of just doing commentary all the time, occasionally do some actual reporting and back up a statement--if not with hard facts, at least put up something that passes as potentially a fact.

 

[Joel Kaye]

and I have choices, then I don't care what you call it.

Fair enough. They have a lot of choices and free speech throughout most of Europe.

If I have to choose between a very few very wealthy people owning everything and a population of serfs beholden to them OR a more even ownership of resources via regulation of the markets I'm taking the latter. Maybe that's social interventionism.

It's clear that unmoderated capitalism results in a consolidation of wealth and power. That's whats been creeping here in America. It's turned into a brisk walk under Bush.

 

[number6]

Your fire department is private? What, you pay per per fire? Paramedics provide for emergencies here and privately owned ambulances transport people. Though I don't think they work any more efficiently than if the Fire Dept were to operate ambulances as well.

Certainly your police dept isn't private too.

I don't mind the free enterprise system. It's just that our system has been corrupted to favor the very wealthy. If you can't see it right now before your eyes with this bailout then nothing will convince you of that. Reaganomics has favored the very wealthy by letting them regulate themselves without real oversight. And both Dems and Repubs are complicit.

Joel, Macville, Pardon me for butting in to you guys discussion but this reminds me of a story. There was this guy who was a son-in-law to a pretty well-to-do farmer, and his cousin-by-marriage, a friend of mine, would try and get his cousin's goat by saying that the father-in-law was going to cut him out of the will when he died. Now it was well known that the other three kids the farmer had... all sons, were not well-honed in the thinking dept. (Probably didn't get enough acetylcholine in their diets as kids)

Anyway, the son-in-law would just smile and say, "That's all right... that's all right. After he dies I'll have it all in three years time."

point is, redistribution of wealth just doesn't work. It just sets things back.

 

[Joel Kaye]

point is, redistribution of wealth just doesn't work. It just sets things back.

No, no. Consolidation of wealth just doesn't work. It just sets things back.

America was created, in part, to flee from aristocracy. Jefferson believed that no or little wealth should pass from generation to generation in order to create an "Aristocracy of Talent". Now that's a very capitalistic, free market idea... but it does require wealth return to common ownership.

The founding fathers had a very great fear of entrenched wealth, power and artistocracy as they knew it very well. I think they were right.

Even in the Bible there is the concept of Jubilee. Every 50 years all debts are forgiven. Again - a redistribution of wealth that worked. Jesus certainly was in favor of it. Now I know God doesn't impress some people much, but that makes an impression on me.