Delicious...
 

Bill McKee wrote:
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Jim" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote:


After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public
funded not for profit?
Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra of the
Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more efficient
than a
bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we
eliminate
private health insurance companies, and go with a single payer
public
option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning into
a
Liberal.
Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for profit"
organizations. I would rather pay for something that works, than
pay
double for something that doesn't.
Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer.
Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it was
Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering class.
Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery...
You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example, before
you make statements like this. Check out the person who's in charge of
the VA.

There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem and
will continue to be for quite a while. What's your point?

--
Nom=de=Plume

Where is the recovery? The lead in the Dow rise is financials. And
they are going up because of the huge amounts of money the Fed is
tossing at them. The job outlook is bad, the retail outlook is bad,
as those 20%+ without a job are not spending. The housing sales
increase, but the price decreased, and the $8k gift from the Fed just
accelerated the purchases and seems as if they are looking at $500
million if fraud with the program. Look for the Dow to pull back 10-15%
shortly. Put stops on your stocks.
Look it up. It's been all over the news. So far, you haven't said
anything revealing about the recovery or lack thereof.

The recovery hasn't started yet. And it won't until REAL jobs are created
and REAL workers have money to spend on REAL goods and services, which of
course will be provided by REAL people doing REAL work. The way your
party is handling the situation is UNREAL. You should be ashamed of
yourself for supporting The king and his court in their underhanded
activities.

You should be ashamed of your intellectual dishonestly.

http://www.recovery.gov


--
Nom=de=Plume


Actually it is you with the intellectual dishonesty. The government spent
tons of money in the wrong place for one thing. Sent it to their cronies on
Wall Street. Want a better recovery, put 50% of that money spent in to SBA
loans. And not spend the other 50%. Let Goldmansackus and the other
"investment" banks fail. The recovery act has not created jobs. Other than
a few paving and infrastucture jobs that needed to be done anyway. When
that paving job is done. Where is the next job for the worker. Govenment
does not creat wealth by borrowing and spending.


When the paving is done there is some tar and feathering that needs doing.

Delicious...
 

nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Jim" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote:


After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public
funded not for profit?
Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra of
the
Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more efficient
than a
bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we
eliminate
private health insurance companies, and go with a single payer
public
option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning into
a
Liberal.
Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for profit"
organizations. I would rather pay for something that works, than
pay
double for something that doesn't.
Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer.
Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it
was
Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering
class.
Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery...
You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example, before
you make statements like this. Check out the person who's in charge
of the VA.

There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem
and will continue to be for quite a while. What's your point?

--
Nom=de=Plume

Where is the recovery? The lead in the Dow rise is financials. And
they are going up because of the huge amounts of money the Fed is
tossing at them. The job outlook is bad, the retail outlook is bad,
as those 20%+ without a job are not spending. The housing sales
increase, but the price decreased, and the $8k gift from the Fed just
accelerated the purchases and seems as if they are looking at $500
million if fraud with the program. Look for the Dow to pull back
10-15% shortly. Put stops on your stocks.
Look it up. It's been all over the news. So far, you haven't said
anything revealing about the recovery or lack thereof.

The recovery hasn't started yet. And it won't until REAL jobs are
created and REAL workers have money to spend on REAL goods and services,
which of course will be provided by REAL people doing REAL work. The way
your party is handling the situation is UNREAL. You should be ashamed of
yourself for supporting The king and his court in their underhanded
activities.

You should be ashamed of your intellectual dishonestly.

http://www.recovery.gov


--
Nom=de=Plume

Actually it is you with the intellectual dishonesty. The government spent
tons of money in the wrong place for one thing. Sent it to their cronies
on Wall Street. Want a better recovery, put 50% of that money spent in
to SBA loans. And not spend the other 50%. Let Goldmansackus and the
other "investment" banks fail. The recovery act has not created jobs.
Other than a few paving and infrastucture jobs that needed to be done
anyway. When that paving job is done. Where is the next job for the
worker. Govenment does not creat wealth by borrowing and spending.

Except that this would have caused an amazing about of pain for average
people. This is the classic Milton Freedman, Chicago School of Economics
philosophy that sounds really good but doesn't work, as shown by various
examples in recent decades.

Didn't Obie graduate from the Chicago school?


While the gov't doesn't create wealth by borrowing and spending, it does
create jobs, the perfect example being just prior to WW2. The unemployment
rate was something like 25%. The FDR got things going and prior to WW2, it
was down to 10%. Not perfect, but it was in the right direction. Then the
gov't spent an insane amount of money to fund the war. What followed was one
of the best growth periods in a long time.

The jobless rate is currently very bad, but the rate of losses per month is
headed in the right direction. The absolute percentage will likely keep
rising over the next year or so, but businesses are starting to hire, and
this trend should continue. Thus, the technical recession is over, according
to most economists, but that doesn't mean it feels good right now.

Sorry if that bursts your bubble.

Delicious...
 

nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Jim" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote:


After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public
funded not for profit?
Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra of
the
Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more efficient
than a
bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we
eliminate
private health insurance companies, and go with a single payer
public
option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning into
a
Liberal.
Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for profit"
organizations. I would rather pay for something that works, than
pay
double for something that doesn't.
Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer.
Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it
was
Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering
class.
Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery...
You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example, before
you make statements like this. Check out the person who's in charge
of the VA.

There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem
and will continue to be for quite a while. What's your point?

--
Nom=de=Plume

Where is the recovery? The lead in the Dow rise is financials. And
they are going up because of the huge amounts of money the Fed is
tossing at them. The job outlook is bad, the retail outlook is bad,
as those 20%+ without a job are not spending. The housing sales
increase, but the price decreased, and the $8k gift from the Fed just
accelerated the purchases and seems as if they are looking at $500
million if fraud with the program. Look for the Dow to pull back
10-15% shortly. Put stops on your stocks.
Look it up. It's been all over the news. So far, you haven't said
anything revealing about the recovery or lack thereof.

The recovery hasn't started yet. And it won't until REAL jobs are
created and REAL workers have money to spend on REAL goods and services,
which of course will be provided by REAL people doing REAL work. The way
your party is handling the situation is UNREAL. You should be ashamed of
yourself for supporting The king and his court in their underhanded
activities.

You should be ashamed of your intellectual dishonestly.

http://www.recovery.gov


--
Nom=de=Plume

Actually it is you with the intellectual dishonesty. The government spent
tons of money in the wrong place for one thing. Sent it to their cronies
on Wall Street. Want a better recovery, put 50% of that money spent in
to SBA loans. And not spend the other 50%. Let Goldmansackus and the
other "investment" banks fail. The recovery act has not created jobs.
Other than a few paving and infrastucture jobs that needed to be done
anyway. When that paving job is done. Where is the next job for the
worker. Govenment does not creat wealth by borrowing and spending.

Except that this would have caused an amazing about of pain for average
people. This is the classic Milton Freedman, Chicago School of Economics
philosophy that sounds really good but doesn't work, as shown by various
examples in recent decades.

While the gov't doesn't create wealth by borrowing and spending, it does
create jobs, the perfect example being just prior to WW2. The unemployment
rate was something like 25%. The FDR got things going and prior to WW2, it
was down to 10%. Not perfect, but it was in the right direction. Then the
gov't spent an insane amount of money to fund the war. What followed was one
of the best growth periods in a long time.

The jobless rate is currently very bad, but the rate of losses per month is
headed in the right direction. The absolute percentage will likely keep
rising over the next year or so, but businesses are starting to hire, and
this trend should continue. Thus, the technical recession is over, according
to most economists, but that doesn't mean it feels good right now.

Sorry if that bursts your bubble.

You won't burst many bubbles with that manure you are slinging, sweetie.

Delicious...
 

nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...

It is like someone who chose not to buy collision insurance then wants
it after they totaled their car.
Not really. Not even the same scale....

--
Nom=de=Plume

Think about it. Is exactly the same. No insurance, you get sick and now
you buy the insurance. Not the way insurance works. It is to spread the
risk. If you only get the insurance when needed, then you failed in the
spreading the risk part.

?? Nothing like it. If everyone is covered, then the risk is spread among,
um, everyone. I don't (shouldn't) have to mention the enormous cost of doing
nothing differently. It's unsustainable. We really need universal coverage.
There are two ways to do it. One is a capitalistic, competitive inducing
public option. Anyone should be able to get it... no restrictions. Then, if
an ins. company wants to compete, they're going to have to trim their costs
and/or increase the benefits to keep customers. The other is heavy
regulation, much like Germany.
lol lol





I think the American people deserve the same
sort of options that members of Congress enjoy. Why do they get a choice and
we don't?
Yea! Finally you make sense.



One question. How do you do nothing, differently.

Delicious...
 

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 22:59:25 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Jim" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote:


After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public
funded not for profit?
Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra of
the
Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more efficient
than a
bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we
eliminate
private health insurance companies, and go with a single payer
public
option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning into
a
Liberal.
Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for profit"
organizations. I would rather pay for something that works, than
pay
double for something that doesn't.
Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer.
Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it
was
Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering
class.
Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery...

You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example, before
you make statements like this. Check out the person who's in charge
of the VA.

There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem
and will continue to be for quite a while. What's your point?

--
Nom=de=Plume

Where is the recovery? The lead in the Dow rise is financials. And
they are going up because of the huge amounts of money the Fed is
tossing at them. The job outlook is bad, the retail outlook is bad,
as those 20%+ without a job are not spending. The housing sales
increase, but the price decreased, and the $8k gift from the Fed just
accelerated the purchases and seems as if they are looking at $500
million if fraud with the program. Look for the Dow to pull back
10-15% shortly. Put stops on your stocks.

Look it up. It's been all over the news. So far, you haven't said
anything revealing about the recovery or lack thereof.

The recovery hasn't started yet. And it won't until REAL jobs are
created and REAL workers have money to spend on REAL goods and services,
which of course will be provided by REAL people doing REAL work. The way
your party is handling the situation is UNREAL. You should be ashamed of
yourself for supporting The king and his court in their underhanded
activities.


You should be ashamed of your intellectual dishonestly.

http://www.recovery.gov


--
Nom=de=Plume


Actually it is you with the intellectual dishonesty. The government spent
tons of money in the wrong place for one thing. Sent it to their cronies
on Wall Street. Want a better recovery, put 50% of that money spent in
to SBA loans. And not spend the other 50%. Let Goldmansackus and the
other "investment" banks fail. The recovery act has not created jobs.
Other than a few paving and infrastucture jobs that needed to be done
anyway. When that paving job is done. Where is the next job for the
worker. Govenment does not creat wealth by borrowing and spending.

Except that this would have caused an amazing about of pain for average
people. This is the classic Milton Freedman, Chicago School of Economics
philosophy that sounds really good but doesn't work, as shown by various
examples in recent decades.

While the gov't doesn't create wealth by borrowing and spending, it does
create jobs, the perfect example being just prior to WW2. The unemployment
rate was something like 25%. The FDR got things going and prior to WW2, it
was down to 10%. Not perfect, but it was in the right direction. Then the
gov't spent an insane amount of money to fund the war. What followed was one
of the best growth periods in a long time.

The jobless rate is currently very bad, but the rate of losses per month is
headed in the right direction. The absolute percentage will likely keep
rising over the next year or so, but businesses are starting to hire, and
this trend should continue. Thus, the technical recession is over, according
to most economists, but that doesn't mean it feels good right now.

Sorry if that bursts your bubble.

lol lol

You've got the patter down pat. Tell a good joke too.

Delicious...
 

In article , says...

nom=de=plume wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote:


After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public
funded not for profit?
Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra of the
Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more efficient
than a
bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we eliminate
private health insurance companies, and go with a single payer
public
option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning into a
Liberal.
Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for profit"
organizations. I would rather pay for something that works, than pay
double for something that doesn't.
Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer.
Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it was
Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering class.
Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery...
You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example, before
you make statements like this. Check out the person who's in charge of
the VA.

There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem and
will continue to be for quite a while. What's your point?

--
Nom=de=Plume

Where is the recovery? The lead in the Dow rise is financials. And
they are going up because of the huge amounts of money the Fed is
tossing at them. The job outlook is bad, the retail outlook is bad, as
those 20%+ without a job are not spending. The housing sales increase,
but the price decreased, and the $8k gift from the Fed just accelerated
the purchases and seems as if they are looking at $500 million if fraud
with the program. Look for the Dow to pull back 10-15% shortly. Put
stops on your stocks.
Look it up. It's been all over the news. So far, you haven't said
anything revealing about the recovery or lack thereof.

The recovery hasn't started yet. And it won't until REAL jobs are created
and REAL workers have money to spend on REAL goods and services, which of
course will be provided by REAL people doing REAL work. The way your party
is handling the situation is UNREAL. You should be ashamed of yourself for
supporting The king and his court in their underhanded activities.


You should be ashamed of your intellectual dishonestly.

http://www.recovery.gov


I don't know what you expect me to conclude from your presentation of
"facts". Spend a few days with that web site. Drill things down and see
if you truly and honestly can say we are on the road to recovery based
on what you find.
Using your web site. I just took a look at how my county benefited.
Supposedly there were 3 contracts awarded and 3 jobs created for a total
cost of $21,471. Thats amazing.

I am not ashamed. You need to wake up and smell the garbage.

We have one road being fixed here in my town. A road that services about
3 dozen million + homes in the outskirts of the town. From what I can
see, it's the same crew that cleans the leaves most times. I don't know
if we hired any extra workers for it.

Delicious...
 

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 15:48:10 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:56:13 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote:


After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public
funded not for profit?

Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra
of
the
Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more
efficient
than
a
bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we
eliminate
private health insurance companies, and go with a single
payer
public
option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning
into a
Liberal.

Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for
profit"
organizations. I would rather pay for something that works,
than
pay
double for something that doesn't.

Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer.

Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it
was
Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering
class.
Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery...


You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example,
before
you
make statements like this. Check out the person who's in charge of
the
VA.

There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem
and
will
continue to be for quite a while. What's your point?

Can you say, double standard...??


What's that? You're clear as mud.

lol lol

I guess I could take Plume fishing, or sit down and eat.. I just can't
wade through the numerous out of context and references to
intellectually dishonest rhetoric.. Sorry Plumeeeee. Just don't have the
time anymore.


Please feel free to either plonk or ignore my posts!

Oy, put yourself out of any misery. I plonked The Freak months ago
and it was a liberating experience. There are such things as hopeless
causes. I can send you my recommended bozo bin.

I had to flush The Freak and Looney Tunes also.
Too bad...I had hoped we could beat some sense into them, but they've been
taken over by the dark side.
I stay on the Lt Colonels case because he's the one guy who should know
better.... unless they sell commissions in the US Army these days.

Delicious...
 

On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 10:59:23 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:



I had to flush The Freak and Looney Tunes also.
Too bad...I had hoped we could beat some sense into them, but they've been
taken over by the dark side.
I stay on the Lt Colonels case because he's the one guy who should know
better.... unless they sell commissions in the US Army these days.


Hi Don.

Are you ready to stop with the immature name-calling and personal
insults yet?

It would improve the atmosphere, no?

Delicious...
 

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 10:59:23 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:



I had to flush The Freak and Looney Tunes also.
Too bad...I had hoped we could beat some sense into them, but they've been
taken over by the dark side.
I stay on the Lt Colonels case because he's the one guy who should know
better.... unless they sell commissions in the US Army these days.


Hi Don.

Are you ready to stop with the immature name-calling and personal
insults yet?

It would improve the atmosphere, no?

I'm watching your lead..Lt Colonel.

Delicious...
 

"Jim" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Jim" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:51:29 -0400, Tosk wrote:


After all, how can a for profit org compete with a public
funded not for profit?
Huh? I thought "privatization" was the cost cutting mantra of
the
Right. You know, how a lean mean corporation was more
efficient than a
bloated government agency. So, does this mean that if we
eliminate
private health insurance companies, and go with a single payer
public
option, our health cost would go down? Damn, you're turning
into a
Liberal.
Not really, look at the success record of govt "not for profit"
organizations. I would rather pay for something that works, than
pay
double for something that doesn't.
Yup. Medicare and the VA don't work. Bummer.
Well, I guess it depends on who is in office at the time. When it
was
Bush they sure didn't, that is if you listen to the chattering
class.
Now miraculously a 10% unemployment rate is a recovery...
You really need to review the facts about the VA, for example,
before you make statements like this. Check out the person who's in
charge of the VA.

There is a technical recovery in process. Jobs are still a problem
and will continue to be for quite a while. What's your point?

--
Nom=de=Plume

Where is the recovery? The lead in the Dow rise is financials.
And they are going up because of the huge amounts of money the Fed
is tossing at them. The job outlook is bad, the retail outlook is
bad, as those 20%+ without a job are not spending. The housing
sales increase, but the price decreased, and the $8k gift from the
Fed just accelerated the purchases and seems as if they are looking
at $500 million if fraud with the program. Look for the Dow to pull
back 10-15% shortly. Put stops on your stocks.
Look it up. It's been all over the news. So far, you haven't said
anything revealing about the recovery or lack thereof.

The recovery hasn't started yet. And it won't until REAL jobs are
created and REAL workers have money to spend on REAL goods and
services, which of course will be provided by REAL people doing REAL
work. The way your party is handling the situation is UNREAL. You
should be ashamed of yourself for supporting The king and his court in
their underhanded activities.

You should be ashamed of your intellectual dishonestly.

http://www.recovery.gov


--
Nom=de=Plume

Actually it is you with the intellectual dishonesty. The government
spent tons of money in the wrong place for one thing. Sent it to their
cronies on Wall Street. Want a better recovery, put 50% of that money
spent in to SBA loans. And not spend the other 50%. Let Goldmansackus
and the other "investment" banks fail. The recovery act has not created
jobs. Other than a few paving and infrastucture jobs that needed to be
done anyway. When that paving job is done. Where is the next job for
the worker. Govenment does not creat wealth by borrowing and spending.

Except that this would have caused an amazing about of pain for average
people. This is the classic Milton Freedman, Chicago School of Economics
philosophy that sounds really good but doesn't work, as shown by various
examples in recent decades.

While the gov't doesn't create wealth by borrowing and spending, it does
create jobs, the perfect example being just prior to WW2. The
unemployment rate was something like 25%. The FDR got things going and
prior to WW2, it was down to 10%. Not perfect, but it was in the right
direction. Then the gov't spent an insane amount of money to fund the
war. What followed was one of the best growth periods in a long time.

The jobless rate is currently very bad, but the rate of losses per month
is headed in the right direction. The absolute percentage will likely
keep rising over the next year or so, but businesses are starting to
hire, and this trend should continue. Thus, the technical recession is
over, according to most economists, but that doesn't mean it feels good
right now.

Sorry if that bursts your bubble.

You won't burst many bubbles with that manure you are slinging, sweetie.


Burst yours didn't I.

--
Nom=de=Plume