Quote from: DianaP on February 10, 2013, 07:18:14 PM
1. Yes, govt agencies actually are better. Better funded, better equipped, more competent workers. 

2. My point is that editors and researchers were used by the exact people you don't like. Therefore, I wouldn't take what they say without looking into it. If you do, you'd realize that Stossel is wrong.

1. USPS is sooo good and deliver mail soo much better than the UPS, they are going to quit delivering mail on saturdays?! hahah much better than UPS

2. so you're saying since you can't trust anybody to do any research ever, John Stossel can't be trusted? and is wrong? that just because you don't agree with someone, their research must be wrong?  how do you trust anybody?  because they have your same bias?  sounds childish


because no matter what i say, with any research on the topic, you always say i'm wrong... this comes to mind...
Diana, the defender of the status quo!! and winner of chess games!

Quote from: oZma on February 10, 2013, 07:53:04 PM
1. USPS is sooo good and deliver mail soo much better than the UPS, they are going to quit delivering mail on saturdays?! hahah much better than UPS

The problem with the Postal Service is one largely manufactured by Congress. I also find it funny that UPS uses the USPS.

Quote from: oZma on February 10, 2013, 07:53:04 PM
1. USPS is sooo good and deliver mail soo much better than the UPS, they are going to quit delivering mail on saturdays?! hahah much better than UPS

2. so you're saying since you can't trust anybody to do any research ever, John Stossel can't be trusted? and is wrong? that just because you don't agree with someone, their research must be wrong?  how do you trust anybody?  because they have your same bias?  sounds childish


because no matter what i say, with any research on the topic, you always say i'm wrong... this comes to mind...
Diana, the defender of the status quo!! and winner of chess games!

1. You do realize that it's being fought so that letters (packages will still be delivered no matter what) remains delivered on Saturdays? People acknowledge that it's a bad idea, so it's being fought against.

2. I'm not saying you can't trust anyone. I'm saying you shouldn't just take something at face value without looking into it. We all showed you how Stossel is wrong, but you're the only one who refuses to see it.

3. You can't just disregard my arguments with some meme (try providing an actual argument), especially when it's a false comparison. After you posted that Stossel stuff, I rationally argued against some points and agreed with others. I agreed that NASA could be cut, just not entirely since there are some parts of NASA that have great potential, such as space mining, which is practical and beneficial, reducing foreign dependency. I also agreed with cutting defense. I don't always say you're wrong, Ozma, but you sure as heck twist what I say A LOT. I am not even a statist. You can read how I spoke in favor of change many times here. I also believe that private practice and state/local govt. have their purposes, but that they can't be trusted with everything.

We (yes, I'm not the only one here that has disagreed with you, so stop singling me out with your childish attacks) didn't just knock over your chess pieces and strutted around like we won. We knocked them over fair and square with real, rational arguments.

Quote from: DianaP on February 10, 2013, 08:22:03 PM
1. You do realize that it's being fought so that letters (packages will still be delivered no matter what) remains delivered on Saturdays? People acknowledge that it's a bad idea, so it's being fought against.

2. I'm not saying you can't trust anyone. I'm saying you shouldn't just take something at face value without looking into it. We all showed you how Stossel is wrong, but you're the only one who refuses to see it.

you showed stossel wrong because you didn't agree and people would lose jobs?  the point was to balance the budget and solve the deficit, not make everyone happy... what other points did you make that i am "refusing to see"?  and just saying "its not a good idea" doesn't mean its wrong.

"Reducing benefits of rich retirees is good. So's increasing taxes on the rich.

Eliminating NASA completely isn't a good idea. They receive less 1% of the US budget. You can eliminate planetary exploration, but there are practical space adventures like space mining. More resource supply means that they'll be less expensive.

Business owners don't think long-term, which is why they didn't convert to the much more efficient solar power. Energy department can stay, or we might never see power plants be converted to solar power. Converting power plants to solar energy instead of each individual building to solar power is much less expensive.

Letting states run education 100% has been proven to be a bad idea. If it weren't for federal intervention, quite a few states would still be teaching the Bible over real biology and abstinence would still be taught instead of practical sexual education such as using condoms, etc. Kids are going to be having sex. Might as well teach them to do it intelligently.

Before agricultural subsidies and other govt aid, farmers were in huge debt and in trouble. Those can stay.

USDHUD provides housing to people who would otherwise be homeless or in very inadequate housing. Heck, one of my friends would actually be living with a family of 5 in a studio apartment his family could barely afford (both parents working) if it weren't for the USDHUD.

I agree in cutting defense. The military doesn't need more than the 2,300 M1 Abram tanks it already has. "

See? I rationally refuted with some and agreed with other points. Plus, you can't solve the deficit by putting hundreds of thousands of people out of work and removing necessary agencies 100%. That's way too much. Stossel just looked to cut whatever costs money without looking into what he was cutting. It's like refusing to pay that $50 bill every month simply because it cost $50, only to realize that it was your electric bill.

As for your Higgs quote, anarchists need to prove their point. We're not just going to blindly trust people to fix all of our problems easily without some evidence that your system can work. If I told you that I was selling a brand new weight loss supplement that would make you lose 50 pounds in a month, would you not ask for proof?

mods, lock this thread... its worthless

everything you say, is just some silly opinion... makes nothing "right or wrong" financially about his cuts

and what you say about Stossel ~ "Stossel just looked to cut whatever costs money without looking into what he was cutting." is just silly... i mean did you read his book?  do you know what he researched?  i mean to just say this?  thats not right... stop acting like a know it all, gosh

Quote from: oZma on February 10, 2013, 08:34:24 PM
everything you say, is just some silly opinion...

Weren't you just unjustly complaining about how I always told you you were wrong? At least I explained to you why you were wrong, and I used facts. If I'm a know-it-all, you're being a hypocrite.

Quote from: kkut on February 10, 2013, 08:51:31 PM
Really? For what, packages that don't absolutely have to ge there on time? at all?     

Hey, my dad's a letter carrier, and he gets his deliveries done on time.

Quote from: DianaP on February 10, 2013, 08:48:52 PM
Weren't you just unjustly complaining about how I always told you you were wrong? At least I explained to you why you were wrong, and I used facts. If I'm a know-it-all, you're being a hypocrite.

I meant its an opinion whether or not to cut it... I don't care for the facts you supply as reasons 'not' to cut... they don't matter unless they change the figures of how much to cut

what do mean when you say 'wrong?'  if the math works out, its right... right? whether or not it's a good idea is a completely different discussion.  do you see what I'm trying to say? do you see why it bothers me when you just blatantly say it's wrong? without having read the book? are you really saying that my perspective on this is so totally wrong that you can't even comprehend it?

I understand your argument for the status quo... everything is fine right now, to the most part, but big changes in either direction towards a much bigger or smaller gov isn't a good idea.

but mine is unthinkable? it's just wrong? and please explain my hypocracy, I'm confused?

Quote from: DianaP on February 10, 2013, 08:48:52 PM
Weren't you just unjustly complaining about how I always told you you were wrong?

Yet you keep telling me that everything I say is just some silly opinion, not taking regard to anything but your own views. That's the hypocrisy.

Quote from: oZma on February 10, 2013, 09:09:13 PM
I understand your argument for the status quo... everything is fine right now, to the most part, but big changes in either direction towards a much bigger or smaller gov isn't a good idea.

but mine is unthinkable?

I appreciate you looking at things my way, but your (Stossel's) views are indeed extreme.

Quote from: DianaP on February 10, 2013, 09:18:13 PM
Yet you keep telling me that everything I say is just some silly opinion, not ttheaking regard to anything but your own views. That's the hypocrisy.

I appreciate you looking at things my way, but your (Stossel's) views are indeed extreme.

I mean to say... every gov program can be cut, nothing is absolutely needed.  the facts you supply don't say THIS PROGRAM IS REQUIRED FOR HUMAN EXISTENCE... the facts say that these programs are good things, we should maybe not cut them, but does not mean you can't, and when you say you CAN'T... ITS OPINION!

do you understand me? I don't know why you are having trouble

nothing you provided means you CAN'T cut those programs, they say you shouldn't and thats opinion

Well, if you're just going to cut anything that you can stay alive without, then we can cut heat, electricity, housing, cars, etc. Once again, extreme.

I'm not saying I never used opinions, but to say that EVERYTHING I said was just an opinion and to just denounce everything I said as silly is unfair.

Quote from: DianaP on February 10, 2013, 09:29:13 PM
Well, if you're just going to cut anything that you can stay alive without, then we can cut heat, electricity, housing, cars, etc. Once again, extreme.

I'm not saying I never used opinions, but to say that EVERYTHING I said was just an opinion and to just denounce everything I said as silly is unfair.

OK, I'm sorry but you took 'everything' too literal.  I should had said all of the decisions not to cut are opinions.

so can we stop arguing over something so trivial?

Oh wow, john stossel? 20/20s John Stossel? mustache guy John Stossel? Global warming denier John Stossel?

I mean the guy's a hunk and very charismatic, but really? I mean most of these budget cuts are nothing but one trick pony BS that only temporarily fixes the budget, closing NASA and getting rid of foreign aid? privatizing? leasing in perpetuity invaluable natural resources? Wow, awesome strategic short term thinking! these solutions are akin to saying, I have a migraine so the cure is to cut off my head

L O L

just one thing about green energy, how come it's flourishing in Germany

keep on dreaming these fluffy Ayn Rand dreams gals.

Quote from: monica.soto on February 10, 2013, 09:40:25 PM
Oh wow, john stossel? 20/20s John Stossel? mustache guy John Stossel? Global warming denier John Stossel?

I mean the guy's a hunk and very charismatic, but really? I mean most of these budget cuts are nothing but one trick pony BS that only temporarily fixes the budget, closing NASA and getting rid of foreign aid? privatizing? leasing in perpetuity invaluable natural resources? Wow, awesome strategic short term thinking! these solutions are akin to saying, I have a migraine so the cure is to cut off my head

L O L

just one thing about green energy, how come it's flourishing in Germany

keep on dreaming these fluffy Ayn Rand dreams gals.

well good thing we're still working on the status quo then huh?

but, but, Stossel is the status quo.

Yet his methods of gutting everything are inefficient and extreme.

Quote from: DianaP on February 10, 2013, 10:13:19 PM
Yet his methods of gutting everything are inefficient and extreme.

regardless...  Nobody said it is going to be pretty...  If the IRS grabbed 100 percent of income over $1 million, the take would be just $616 billion. That's only a third of this year's deficit.  I mean, what do you propose we do to balance it?  At least I offered a solution?

Quote from: monica.soto on February 10, 2013, 09:40:25 PM
keep on dreaming these fluffy Ayn Rand dreams gals.

hehe

Cut military spending, reform the tax code to increase wealthy Americans' taxes slightly, stop hunting down potheads by cutting down the ADA, reform unemployment to a few months in order to increase incentive to go back to work. That's just off the top of my head.