Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 92

Thread: California goes broke, halts $3.5 billion in payments

  1. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: California goes broke, halts $3.5 billion in payments

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Not funding a social program is a "draconian punishment?"

    edit: Also, weren't you a Ron Paul guy?
    What does a "Ron Paul" guy mean? I never did understand the guy because I found it hard to sit through one of his whiney little speeches.

  2. #62
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: California goes broke, halts $3.5 billion in payments

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    What does a "Ron Paul" guy mean? I never did understand the guy because I found it hard to sit through one of his whiney little speeches.
    I seem to remember Goldenboy ranting about the Fed and talking about how Ron Paul would cut all spending out and bring America into the golden age of freedom.

    That makes his support for the liberalest of liberal social programs all the more hilarious.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: California goes broke, halts $3.5 billion in payments

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I seem to remember Goldenboy ranting about the Fed and talking about how Ron Paul would cut all spending out and bring America into the golden age of freedom.

    That makes his support for the liberalest of liberal social programs all the more hilarious.
    All the Ron Pauligans did was parrot the most asinine bulleted talking points about isolating ourselves, cutting the government down to minimal operations, and screech hyperboles describing the government as some monstrous entity that was sitting over the Constitution with a magic eraser to take out the Bill of Rights one by one.

    The difference between a normal person and a Ron Pauligan is a paranoid LSD trip.

  4. #64
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: California goes broke, halts $3.5 billion in payments

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    LOL at whatever idiot researcher who thought that was a reliable testing method. Let's try to brainstorm a possible factor that could skew this study. Hmmm.....could it be that cities that are developed enough and have the money to implement things like SEP's are just generally more likely to have lower HIV transmission rates than cities like Cape Town or Mumbai?
    What does that have to do with the fact that HIV spread was reduced in SEP/NEP cities? Are you arguing that a decreased rate is is negligible because HIV spreads fast in non developed cities?

    Weak tactic though. Are we to assume you are the authority on HIV research?


    Assuming that's true, why don't you tell me? You're the one arguing that it's worth it.
    AKA cover and run. Yes, the cost of the programs completely underscore their benefits...

    Why the **** would I do that?
    I would not want to do this either if it were plausible that the benefits of these programs far outweigh the costs, being that i was skeptical of that programs effectiveness.

    Why the **** did you bother to reply to me in the first place?
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  5. #65
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: California goes broke, halts $3.5 billion in payments

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Not funding a social program is a "draconian punishment?"

    edit: Also, weren't you a Ron Paul guy?
    Do the ramifications of cheating and shooting up with dirty needles warrant a death sentence? If you answer yes, then i believe it is a Draconic opinion.


    BTW, what does my support of Ron Paul have to do with this debate? Completely irrelevant, but i do understand why you feel it necessary. When you cannot refute, attack!
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  6. #66
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: California goes broke, halts $3.5 billion in payments

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    What does that have to do with the fact that HIV spread was reduced in SEP/NEP cities? Are you arguing that a decreased rate is is negligible because HIV spreads fast in non developed cities?

    Weak tactic though. Are we to assume you are the authority on HIV research?
    No, I'm someone who once took a course on statistics and understands the concept of correlation v. causation. I would suggest you do the same.

    AKA cover and run. Yes, the cost of the programs completely underscore their benefits...

    I would not want to do this either if it were plausible that the benefits of these programs far outweigh the costs, being that i was skeptical of that programs effectiveness.

    Why the **** did you bother to reply to me in the first place?
    Because you made a completely fatuous argument. All I pointed out was:

    Whether or not something is generally a net positive is not the same as whether or not something is economically efficient.
    And 20 posts later, I see that you're still missing the point.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  7. #67
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: California goes broke, halts $3.5 billion in payments

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I seem to remember Goldenboy ranting about the Fed and talking about how Ron Paul would cut all spending out and bring America into the golden age of freedom.

    That makes his support for the liberalest of liberal social programs all the more hilarious.
    I do not like the Fed, mostly because they are a monopoly which undermines the market system. Not sure what that has to do with this topic though.

    Secondly, Ron Paul never stated he would cut all spending, only Federal spending that was unnecessary. We are arguing about a state program, of which the states have all the authority to devise whatever program they see fit IMO.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  8. #68
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: California goes broke, halts $3.5 billion in payments

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Do the ramifications of cheating and shooting up with dirty needles warrant a death sentence? If you answer yes, then i believe it is a Draconic opinion.
    Death is indeed a draconian punishment for cheating. However, you're conflating jallman's belief that these programs should not be funded with an actual imposition of said punishment. If jallman had stated that he believes cheaters should be forcibly injected with HIV, then your statement would have made sense.

    BTW, what does my support of Ron Paul have to do with this debate? Completely irrelevant, but i do understand why you feel it necessary. When you cannot refute, attack!
    It adds nuance and flavor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    I do not like the Fed, mostly because they are a monopoly which undermines the market system. Not sure what that has to do with this topic though.

    Secondly, Ron Paul never stated he would cut all spending, only Federal spending that was unnecessary. We are arguing about a state program, of which the states have all the authority to devise whatever program they see fit IMO.
    Of course, but in my experience, the vast majority of Paulites like to style themselves as libertarians. This isn't quite a libertarian program.
    Last edited by RightinNYC; 02-04-09 at 02:05 PM.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  9. #69
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: California goes broke, halts $3.5 billion in payments

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    No, I'm someone who once took a course on statistics and understands the concept of correlation v. causation. I would suggest you do the same.
    Then put up or shut up. Specifically state the flaw in the study.


    Because you made a completely fatuous argument. All I pointed out was
    LOL, which was?



    And 20 posts later, I see that you're still missing the point.
    It is accepted that SEP/NEP's reduce the spread of HIV, of which the cost of doing so is fractional to the total benefit of the given state. Your talking out of a paper ***. So prove it or be gone!
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  10. #70
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: California goes broke, halts $3.5 billion in payments

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Death is indeed a draconian punishment for cheating. However, you're conflating jallman's belief that these programs should not be funded with an actual imposition of said punishment. If jallman had stated that he believes cheaters should be forcibly injected with HIV, then your statement would have made sense.
    If it could have been preventable, as my exagerated example concluded, then those who were partaking in those actions would not have the death sentence. Besides, my response was in regards to Jallman's "Darwinism" statement.



    It adds nuance and flavor.
    But is about as relevant as my breakfast this morning.

    Of course, but in my experience, the vast majority of Paulites like to style themselves as libertarians. This isn't quite a libertarian program.
    Anarchists mascarading as libertarians give true libertarians a bad name. You would be absolutely correct if it were a federally mandated program. Also, Jallman has all the right to disagree, but his disagreement does not constitute the program as ineffective in terms of its goal, and cost efficiency.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •