On Wed, 13 Oct 2010 10:12:14 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


"Wayne.B" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 22:13:08 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

That's the problem with entitlements. Once they're out there, they
become a sacred right. For a variety of reasons US manufacturing has
become uncompetetive in the world market place. Increased
entitlements and the resulting higher tax rates can only make the
problem worse. A service based economy can only take you so far.
Sooner or later you have to make something or have enough foreign
exchange to purchase it elsewhere. Right now we are extending IOUs to
fund our imports but sooner or later those chips will be called in.


So, which ones are you willing to give up? We have a fairly low tax rate
already, certainly vs. the rest of the world.

You conveniently miss the point: The discussion is/was about
starting new entitlements not getting rid of the existing ones. In
addition to having lower tax rates than many other countries, we also
have a much higher standard of living. Unfortunately that is likely
to change.


I didn't conveniently miss anything. All the Teabaggers are complaining
about deficits right? So, which programs do they want to cut?

I am not a teabagger, not by a long shot. They are just as rabid as
the loony left. You can't cut any existing programs because it is
politically unacceptable. I already stated that.

Your claim that we have a much higher standard of living isn't that
accurate. It depends is a more accurate comment. How about infant mortality?
How about life expectancy?

We have a very diverse population demographic in this country and some
of those segments have very unhealthy lifestyles and make bad
decisions about lots of other things. No governmental program is
going to fix that, and broad based statistics get dragged down as a
result.

How about medical outcomes per dollar spent?

I have no idea how to evaluate that.