It is such a simple concept and life would be much easier if liberals understood.
The money that is spent on public sector employees is good for them insofar as they can afford their mortgage, groceries etc.... but simultaneously bad for the rest of us who then have less money to pay for their own mortgage, groceries etc...
It baffles me that so many liberals can't seem to understand this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
36 comments:
Yes, very simplistic-minded Denis, all liberals work for the government, right? SHEESH!
I'm liberal (damn staight I am!) and I don't work for the public sector. I pay for my own mortgage and groceries. And am proud to be a citizen who supports the good work that our government does on behalf of all of us together!
Wow Sean, if you are a representative sample of a liberal, then I now understand, its because you are a moron. Please reread my post. I did not say or even insinuate that all liberals work for the government. My point was rather simple and you ignored it completely. Again, the point is that liberals tend to view the money spent on public sector employees as good for said employees, but that they don't see lost money to pay for them as bad for those forced to pay. If you have something to say on the subject, go for it. If you want to talk about some other subject, please use your own blog.
This "Moron" doesn't think that paying public employees is "bad for the rest of us". I am proud to be a citizen who supports the good work that our government does on behalf of all of us together. In general, it's worth every penny!
This "Moron" thinks over-paying public employees, and then collecting their Union dues for them and handing it over to an organization that uses the collected dues to help elect co-conspirators who continue to pilfer the profits and earning of the Private sector to stuff the pockets and over compensate the public sector.
The First Moron Savings & Loan is almost tapped out. The Wisconsin branch is rapidly eliminating it's charitable giving. In the next ten years the Wisc. union vanish completely.
Well Sean, public employment is neither categorically bad or good. Liberals have a tendency to behave as though all public employment is good, end of story. Yes I realize that that is a bit of an overstatement, but then again, when do liberals ever want to decrease the number or the pay of public employees? Answer: almost never.
So there you go again Sean with the straw man. Paying for anything is "bad" in the sense that it would be better to have it for free. And it is "bad" to the extent that we are paying more for the employment than we need to. Like purchases we make voluntarily, we weigh the "bad" (paying) against the "good" (what we receive in service). We need to do the same in government but liberals tend to fight it every step of the way, largely because they view government employment as categorically good.
Well Brownie in your case you've labeled yourself correctly because you're still swallowing the lie that public sector workers are "over compensate"d.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/02/are_wisconsins_state_and_local.html
"I am proud to be a citizen who supports the good work that our government does on behalf of all of us together."
Excellent! Finally someone who can explain why we are bombing both sides in the Libyan civil war. Tell me why you are proud of this sean. Heh.
Nemo, I think we should include the military in any cuts were going to make. After all, we spend more the THE REST OF THE WORLD COMBINED! AND that's how Bu$hyboy got us into this fine mess.
BTW Brownie, this "Moron" thinks over-paying private corporations, and then letting them pool their Trade Association dues and hand them over to a lobbying organization that uses the collected dues to help elect co-conspirators who continue to pilfer the profits and earning of the Public to stuff the pockets and over compensate the private corporations (is bad).
How do ya like them (turnabout) apples?
President Bush got us into the Libyan civil war? That's your final answer, sean?
I wonder where the breaking point would be for the Sean Cranley's of the world to have too much gov't. Same with taxes. Should the so called rich pay 50%? 80%? 100%?
No Nemo, Bu$hyboy didn't get us into the No Fly zone over Iraq either, that kept Saddam in check, didn't cost a trillion dollars or result in the death of even one American Service Man. In case you haven't read the papers he invaded and occupied on trumped up intell. Why do I even bother with your garbage?
Dear Mental the tax rates should go back to where they were when we could actually pay our bills. Since we don't have more public employees per capita than we did when we could pay our bills that would seem not to be the problem. If you look at our national debt it arrises from two things, tax cuts and foreign adventurism, both disproportionately the work of the Republicons.
I don't want anymore government than is needed, but I want to pay for it and I'm not dumb enough to believe in the voodoo trickle on economics of taxcuts = more revenue. 30 years have proven the falsehood of that lie.
sean, I'm not going to be drawn into your unhinged revision of the Bush Presidency. Best save it for a thread over at BURP. Still wondering why you are proud of our recent role in Libya.
"voodoo trickle on economics of taxcuts = more revenue"
Year Federal Total Direct Revenue (Bil$)
1981 599.30
1982 617.80
1983 600.60
1984 666.40
1985 734.00
1986 769.20
So you are saying that it's a conservative lie to state that 769.20 is greater than 599.30. Heh.
Hey Seanie..Thanks for the Apples. The difference between private and public is the key. When you take the Tax-payers money and hand it over to the unions and they use it against the citizenry. Versus the Private sector where moneys earned can spent or wasted in whatever way the choose, included to support candidates that support lower taxes and smaller govt. where individual liberty's and freedom is held by the individual.
Nemo, perhaps you were not aware that the man the myth Ronald Reagan RAISED taxes several times over the time period you cite (while increasing the deficit massively).
Brownie, it's not the public's money. Union members pay their union dues out of their private salary which belongs to them because they EARNED it! So it IS the "Private sector where moneys earned can spent or wasted in whatever way the choose, . . ."
Duh!
Since revenues went up over the time period I cited along with the deficit it is clearly spending that was not controlled. Last I checked sean, the House authors ALL spending bills. Who was in charge in the House during this time period sean?
Still don't understand why we bombed Libya or why you are proud of it. Guess I'll never know, you seem to only be capable of ADD style replies (Nemo: Why sean? sean: Well...Oh, look a chicken!).
"Still don't understand why we bombed Libya or why you are proud of it." Now Nemo, I thought you'd grown out of your failed tactic of just making shtuff up.
Sorry sean, I don't know where I got the idea that you are a proud citizen who supports the good work that our government does on behalf of all of us together(!). I should have know that someone with your depth and intellect could never have written such a broadly foolish statement. I apologize and look forward to your upcoming Barack Obama : War Criminal posts. Heh.
Good work Nemo!
Anon, please feel free to counter any arguments as you wish but do avoid personal attacks and attacks on businesses.
Downtown Brown sells eyeglasses downtown.
You sell misc. gifts, clothing and jewelry downtown.
How is this attacking anyone?
So let me get this straight Nemo. Because I generally support the work that government does on our behalf and believe the efforts of people who work for the government are generally worthwhile and not to be denigrated and reviled by Cons like you. Because of that you think (in black and white as ussual) that means that I support everything that government does, all the time without exception?
I can only come to this conclusion regarding your ridiculously dense statements based on comments I've made in response to this post which never mentioned Libya at all. Quite the leap Nemo, why don't take another one.
And Denis, seriously? I gave you more credit than to chime in with Nemo on one his most cretanous and irrelevant comments. I stand corrected.
sean, you don't support (with pride!) everything the government does on our behalf? Why, that must mean that there are things that the government does that you would like to cut. These are family supporting jobs that you would so causally eliminate! Plus these social servants you would toss onto the scrap heap are underpaid (I have proof [insert lefty link here]). You and the rest of your teabagger buddies lack the empathy and humanity to ever understand. Booosh! Booooooosh! Heh.
Anon, what DB or I sell is not even remotely relevant to the subject at hand.
At Denis, it is entirely relevant, so relevant that you even felt the need to remove my previous post stating such facts.
"liberals please think"
An oxymoron if there ever was one! Liberals don't think. They feel. And they feel best when they get their hands on your money.
Nemo, you don't even know who the hell you're aguing with anymore. I've never advocated keeping jobs simply because they support families.
Jobs should provide a useful service AND support families. Because (in case you Cons haven't noticed) that is what individual humans live in, families. Oh and btw, families, they live in communities. The health and well being of all three are inextricably interlinked. Thus concludes today's anthropology (human nature) epistle to the Cult of Con.
You seem to respond to what somebody told I (as a liberal) would say rather than what I actually said. Because I don't know where you got that from but it didn't come from me.
And yes of course there are gov't programs/functions that I would reduce or eliminate. That doesn't make the people who work at those jobs (some of which will be in the private sector as well, mind you) some sort of degenerate subspecies as many of you guys seem to regard them.
sean, so if the "useful service" of a job is only to support a family, the very foundation of the redistribution premise of the left, that's fine? Heh.
@Sean
"Jobs should provide a useful service AND support families. (blah, blah, blah)... Oh and btw, families, they live in communities. The health and well being of all three are inextricably interlinked..."
Yeah, Sean, and the community will fall apart once too many of us exist by picking the pockets of everyone else. At some point a guy has to create wealth (pie) on his own. Sponging the pie is always easier than creating it. Which explains why liberals are attracted to grabbing the fruits of others' labor, while sanctimoniously proclaiming how noble their (teaching, city, county, state, fed, etc.) government service is. The service should always be subservient to the wealth creation. Otherwise the golden goose dies. That's where we are at.
"picking the pockets" "Sponging" "grabbing the fruits of others" "sanctimoniously" "golden goose dies"
Nothing but a lot of venomous denigration and nonsense. I rest my case.
Yeah, we get a little disgusted when those who take aren't gracious enough to say thank you. Then are obnoxious enough call their taxpayer-funded largess a "right." Far from nonsense, what you are seeing is Atlas shrugging. Get used to it. Venomous denigration? Pretty thin skinned, aren't we? But you've brought it on yourself.
Anon 3:19, well said.
sean, your definition of good jobs reminds me of your definition of human life. You remember that one don't you? The one where a sleeping man is not considered human?
They don't "take" they earn Ano. What is this a fricken Steve Martin routine? Hi, I'm a public employee and I'd like to thank each and every one of you, thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you . . .
Altas Farted! Ayn Rand is high priestest of selfishness, greed and indifference, the core values of the Cult of Con. Paully "Lyin" Ryan is her proselytizing disciple.
If you want to know what a REAL conservative thought about Ms. Rand, check out what Whitaker Chambers (William F. Buckley's right hand man) had to say in his 1957 commentary about her book the Fountainhead in National Review magazine: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/222482/big-sister-watching-you/flashback
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Nemo, what'd I tell you bout makin shtuff up! Silly boy.
You really do have all the answers. Be smug and induldge your liberal sense of rationalization, Sean, but the well is dry. We are done being fleeced, and yeah, I'm sure that when we push back it comes across pretty rude. We've learned from the best (of you) but are way too gracious to employ your sides thug tactics.
But our resolve is strong. Get used to paying more of your own way. Or use your superior intellect and try going into business for yourself. You'll soon find out how much fun it is. What you need is a little bit of revelation - the kind that hits you quickly once you become actually responsible for putting forth a product folks WILLINGLY pay YOU for. Instead of forcing them to. Or crying to your boss about how tough you have it. Big dif.
sean, I guess we'll include a short memory with your other assets.
Anon 1:54, again well said!
Ano, I am in awe of your faith in the blessed entrepreneurs, the patron saints of the Cult of Con. We who work in the private sector bow in their presence and take only small solice that although we lie way below their evolutionary station, we are at least still miles above the degenerates who sink to work for the public, teaching our children, collecting our gabage, keeping the peace & safety, securing justice, connecting point A & B, etc.
But at the risk of breach that behavior such as becomes a humble freeman, I must contest your use of the term "thug tactics" That is NOT a reality but GOPropaganda talking point. I suggest you pull your head out of your AM radio.
Nemo, I recall the discussion you're refering to, I also recall that you tried to distort and lie about it then as you are now. Your integrity has not improved.
Post a Comment