Does that justify saying eliminate it? why not fix the system? why do we always settle for less? it is all management and oversight. Cant we do that in order to get it right?

Is that a reason to suggest we live in a society that force people who really deserve help to go begging at Chrches' doors?

where are the Gov workers who follow those who are chronically on welfare? where are the programs to get their butts off the floor and into training centers, and work. and if they refuse then they lose their rigth to be helped?

you can even make it mandatory, public works-program. If they need help, go work there and you get paid. Is that soooo difficult to do?

many roads, bridges, public buildings and even private ones can use that service and it will force the lazy to get off their butt and work. make work fro them if you have to .... they will be forced to.

There are many ways to fix the system. condemning it is not one of them ...

but unfortunately that is the policy of the Right .... all complaints and no action ... The Right doesnt know and in fact doesnt want to Govern. Just use the society's resources and opportunities ... but dont pay for it. That goes against the Right's own principle: there are no free lunches ..... but then again when was the last time the Right had any consistent principle? remember the Deficit and fiscal responsibilities?

The surplus became "a problem" when Clinton made it materialize. Even Green Span said it was bad. That was the ultimate in hypocrisy, wasnt it? after decades of complaining about the deficits, here comes Reagan and Bush I to increase it to stratospheric heights and the Right kept saying ... dont worry about that they are not that bad after all. Then when Clinton made it disapper and created a surplus, that became bad and dangerous. during all that time the complaints about entitlements never stopped.
even when there was a surplus ....

You and the Rigth never complain about no-bid contracts, kick-backs, waste on unbelievable scale in the military, nepotism in government agencies by cronies and buddies, subsidies to corp who make tens of billions of dollars of profits then complain about entitlement ????!!!!!.

Yes the entitlement programs need fixing .... I said that and most rational people say that. .... Now tell me when was the last time that you or anyone from the Right wrote an article about all the theft/corruption/mismanagement i mentioned above?

None that i am aware of .....

WRONG!

First, I am NOT a Republican, TA, as you should well know.

Second, I have REPEATEDLY condemned those kinds of expenditures. You lose all credibility when you make comments like this.

We were having a decent conversation. If you're going to make digs like lumping me with the right and putting words in my mouth, though, I am done with the conversation.

we still are Gid. I just did not see anything from you about that .,. sorry if i missed it. but your writing in general is about condemning what the gov does instead of trying to fix it. That is my point.

btw, it doesnt matter whether you are Republican or not. many republicans are very reasonable and have contributed a lot to the current programs and they still trying to fix them. But the GOP is now controlled not by those moderates but the newcon and their neoconservative movement.

sorry again if i missed the articles you mentioned.

That is ridiculous. You don't even recognise "lots and lots of data" as something other than "nothing". It is no wonder Draginol is growing so impatient with you.

Data counts.

What do you base your opinions on? Fairy tales?

Grand. Then why use tax money to pay for it?

Don't get me wrong, I am all for a (partly) tax-funded healthcare system. But being for such a system and claiming that it has nothing to do with redistribution is dishonest.

Actually, no. If I have an issue, I'm working on it. And, uh, I've actually GIVEN you the solution, if you read it. Remove welfare entirely from federal control, and give the power to the states. Some states will have massive welfare programs, while others' programs will be virtually nonexistent. That should be their right as the state to decide.

The problem with the welfare program as it sits, TA, is the same as the problem with almost any help program. Rather than work towards its own obsolescence, people in these programs actually work to EXPAND these programs. A perfect example can be given in the area of Children's Protective Services (CPS), one of the biggest targets in my gun sights. While CPS started with a legitimate aim, they expanded their role from being that of protecting children from abuse and neglect to that of investigators, and even of DEFINING abuse and neglect. Why? Because there were more dollars available if they did so.

When they didn't get as many cases as they needed to justify the funding, they took to BEGGING the public to call them, even on the merest suspicion of abuse and neglect. As a result, lives have been ruined, jobs have been lost, all on the vengeful false allegations of a hateful neighbour or ex-spouse. The best way to get back at a parent in this country is to call CPS on them. You can sit back and watch the fireworks while they're none the wiser. Sad, really.

And the worst part is, their actions actually ENABLE the real abusers, first by filling up their caseload so that REAL cases of abuse or neglect aren't given the proper attention while they're out investigating Joe Public whose neighbor's pissed at the color of his fence; second by tainting the investigation by sending out an "investigator" who does not use proper evidence gathering techniques in their investigation, or even obtain the proper warrants for a search unless the family literally stands in the door and refuses them entry. This is a problem I have detailed many times, and I've detailed the solutions EXTENSIVELY. I may repost those articles at some time, but I won't go into them now.

So you want my solution? Here it is:

Give complete responsibility for welfare programs to the state government. Get the federal government out of it entirely, up to and including cabinet posts dedicated to that end.

At the state level, use welfare funds ONLY as a stopgap safety net. Don't put time limits on it, but don't give a minimum time either. Focus on solutions, not on temporary fixes. If a family needs relocation assistance to work, get them relocation assistance to a job once a prospective offer has been made. Help them with training programs, but do so in a way that they contribute to their own education through service.

Eliminate foodstamps entirely. Work with groups such as Second Harvest to stock food banks, and provide needy families with food, education on food preparation and nutrition, and basic toiletries. Staff these food banks with families enrolled in the program to work with assembling food packages, and families who have recently "graduated from" the program as counselors to assist families in the program, as they have the experience of having "been there. Set up an extensive mentoring program to lift these families out of the CYCLE of poverty. Enlist the help of churches, but don't make their assistance essential to the program.

Clothing banks can be set up on a similar model.

For housing, create cheap, affordable communal living spaces that provide clean, comfortable, but not luxurious accomodations. The maintenance of these facilities can be managed by transitional employees who are working their way out of the program.

Provide an extensive volunteer network and return the concept of community. Get back to "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" and away from a system that divides and enables destructive behaviour. If you want to end poverty, you must see it for what it is, and eliminate the things that cause it to continue. Enabling it only makes the problem worse.

And yes, I have a plan to pay for the whole thing. But that's another article entirely!

Detailed enough for you?

I have no problem with that at all. But dont you see the problem in that?

It is the same missmanagement and corruption on the state level.

it really doesnt matter where and who puts the programs in action. It is how and what the program does. If we all concentrate on that instead of arguing about the need for these programs we , and the country, will be much better. All i read here is tax-cutting, wealth distribution, stealing from the rich, ..etc.

That doesnt sound like people who really care about their country and society.

As for the CPS, i personally hate the idea itself. Yes, people who abuse their kids should be punished but that could be treated like any other crime. why we need a special agency for that? People are responsible for their kids well being and safety, if they dont do that it becomes a crime on an individual bases. going around and invistigate every time a kid complains that his mother slapped him/her is really a stupid idea to start with.

This is not what i am concerned with at all. I am concerned about people who are unemplyed, sick, uneducated, cant go to college, hungry , homeless ... etc.

I dont personally suffer any of these, but it is all around me and i can see it. That bothers me and hurts me, because i cant solve it by my self. and noone here seems to care. As if we leave these issues alone, it will be ok.

I know it will not be ok for any of us. except of course those who can afford to put fences and guards around themselves. I dont even want to live in a fenced enclave even if i can afford it.

All your suggestions are excellent start .... but that is far cry from always complaining about governmenet programs and taxes. These programs and ideas you are suggeting need funds to be done and people to do it. Hope we all keep talking about how do we do that in the best and least expensive way.

you see .... we have a lot to talk about not just cutting taxes for the rich and eliminating programs. how about fixing the waste in the military? redesign subsidies to actually encourage energy independence and effecient products, and all other major issues that would benefit all of us and make it easier for the rich to get richer and the poor to be less poor. Is that too bad?

But see, that's why I didn't like your stereotype. If you look on my blog, it is not a continual kvetch about programs and taxes, and when it is, I always have a solution to back it up. You have to prove your thesis that there IS a problem, though, before you can advance a reform agenda.



Yes and no, TA. Two things, though:

1. I've detailed my problems with the federal system. Rural areas get left out in the cold at the expense of urban pockets.

2. At the state level, it is much easier to police mismanagement and corruption because it happens at a lower level. Don't believe me? Try this experiment. Call your state senator. Now call your US senator. Unless you know them, I can virtually guarantee the state senator will call back first.

There is no perfect system, you are right. If things worked the way they were meant to work, churches, synagogues, and mosques would be taking care of the poor and needy and government would have no need to get involved. The government stepped in after these groups failed. SO what we need is reform within our own faiths as well...but that's another issue entirely.

Actually, TA, this misconception is exactly that; a misconception. For most people, "can't" go to college really means "won't TRY". There is ample funding for poor people to go to college.

Do you know how much I have paid for TUITION this go around, TA? Not a blessed dime. Yes, I work full time, but that is to support my family. I can assure you there is a boatload of money out there if people would only take advantage of it.

if you are partly for it then we are not in disagreement here.

Why it is not redistribution? here is why:

I said that before and all societies recognize the danger of leaving problems around them without solving them. The people who remain sick and cant afford treatment or insurence cause problems for the rest of us. we leave them untreated at the risk of our own health and well being.

we pay to treat them to protect ourselves. That is why it is not redistribution. it is pure self-interest .... pure and simple.

same with school drop-outs, drugs, unemployment, hunger, homelessness.... etc. all dangers to us and we all should protect ourselves not by fences around us but by minimizing these problems.

There is no way that anyone can eliminate these problems entirely. Poors, sick, uneducated and dangerous people will always exist in any society. The trick is to keep their numbers to a safe minimum for our own self-interst.if some get frutrated with me because i expose their self-destructive tunnel vision so be it.

Of course date is useful ... but picking and choosing what the data mean is my point. Not only that, but pretending that someone is the only one who understands the issues while in fact they are looking at them from a very narrow angle is an arrogance beyound belief.

A self-admitting dont-care-about-others attitude is really not qualified to deal with any social issue that affects the lives of others. If you dont care about others how can you get involved in discussing what affects them? you disqualified yourself already ... so why are you discussing it?

I can understand complaining about paying any taxes at all from someone who doesnt care. that is their rights. but pretending that what they say is based on data or sound policy is a deciet and a way to hide behind false pretenses. That is pure dishonesty. say it as it is: I dont care and I dont like paying for anything that is not directly affecting me NOW.

I will never object to anyone saying that. It is the pretense of knowing what is the best policy that i am objecting to. If that gets them frustrated ...well... so be it.

I agree completely. and it doesnt matter who manages these programs. and teh rural areas are certainly deserve more attention.

Yes and no, TA. The biggest argument for some sort of reform in the health care industry is actually much simpler:

Because we're ALREADY paying for it.

Basically, because ER's cannot turn people away, we often find ourselves paying for the vastly inflated emergency room visit...often with an ambulance trip thrown in to boot. How? Through the bad debt writeoffs and increased rates charged to cover default.

What I am leaning towards at this point is a program that would subsidize, but not pay, health insurance premiums for qualifying families. I need a lot more research to crunch the numbers, but with the numbers I have, it actually looks doable without increasing what we're already spending. I don't want to give away my best stuff in a forum response though, so when I get the numbers together, I'll manufacture an article with more detail.

great and you did a great job for yourself and for your family AND for your society and your country. You did all That BECAUSE of these programs that some say they dont want to pay for them and call it redsitribution. Your Eeducation is protecting me and my kids and i have no problem contributing a little to it. Some dont like that at all. that is what gets me upset because it puts more load on me and the others who dont object to paying.

You got my point? if more pay without objection and fighting these programs all the time it will be easier for me and others who are not rich people. which is the majority of the society.

No, we're fighting raising taxes to extend these programs. And we arefighting inefficiency, TA, those are the main things.

One other problem with the federal government is that it adds another layer of bureaucracy, which increases costs, and decreases efficiency, as the number of hands the money goes through to get to the recipient increases greatly.

When I managed group homes, TA, I did some calculating. I realized that every resident of the group home was at least partly responsible for at least 8 people's jobs, at or below the county level. Add in the state and national level, and you see the problem. The lower the level at which the bureaucracy operates, the more efficient it is likely to become.

No One , and I really mean No One (regardless of the nonsense of the Right that Dems like taxes)want to or like to raise taxes. so let's leave that nonsense out of the discussion.

You yourself said that there are areas in the country that are being neglected, shouldnt they get what they need in development so they can catch up with the rest of the country?

efeciency and smart management of tax collection and spending would extend those programs without raisng taxes. the gov currently collects money that can provide much more services if it operates effeciently. We can all help bring that instead of wasting time undermining that same gov by trying to starve it. starving it is not the solution as the Right thinks. Fixing it IS the solution.

Gid, I believe that you have the right ideas but your methods are not consistent with your objectives. In order to deal with the problem you mentioned, fixing not starving is the only way out. This will increase the consumer base and the work-force base which increase business profits for the same people objecting to this same policy.

Exactly. I said that already. lets' eliminate the middle step and we can get better service at lower cost (see comment #51). But you can never get that through the heads of the socialized medicine crowd Including OUR PRESIDENT HIMSELF. He actually said that: "they can always go to the ER".

Amazing ... isnt it? as if the tooth fairy pays for the ER !!!!

and they say they know it all. !!!!!!

I disagree, TA. You don't have to look hard to find bloat and inefficiency in all departments. Instead of looking to eliminate the inefficiency, politicians look for "new sources of revenue" (read: taxes). It's not nonsense, it's fact.

A tax rollback is still a tax.

A vice tax is still a tax.

I don't put the blame on either party exclusive of the other; the only differences between the Dems and the GOP as far as I can see are: 1) the spending priorities of each party, and 2) The Dems, to their credit, want to actually PAY for the programs they propose, rather than put future generations in hock.



You don't fix a thoroughly broken system, TA, you replace it. Education should not be a federal priority, but a state one. Same with welfare and medical care. Making them federal priorities, as I mentioned earlier, adds another middleman, increases the bloat, and increases the likelihood of committing fraud undetected.

I'm not talking about starving the programs, not at all. I'm talking about fiscal responsibility. We expect it of businesses, we expect it of individuals, and we certainly should expect it of our government. I've witnessed firsthand the way government money is wasted when government funds are involved. Let me use an example.

When I managed group homes, the first year, I budgeted out our household allotment. I spread it out over the year, and late in the year, a major expense came up that NEEDED to be paid. The household budget I had scrimped and saved to preserve was gone.

My supervisor instructed me the following year that I was to spend the household budget by January 31, using the rationale that if an emergency came up, they would be forced to find funds elsewhere to cover it. This was the way the other households operated, and this is the way I was to do it.

The "other" money didn't come from the tooth fairy either, TA, it was off budget expense that basically forced the higher ups to shell out money by pretty much holding them for ransom. If it happened in am 8 bed CBRF in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, I have no doubt it happened similarly in other areas.

Shall I tell you about the time we had to receive food stamps and received over $700 per month, more than TWICE what I normally spend on groceries to feed our family? Ever wonder why you see folks buying ribeye with food stamps? That would be why.

Continuing to plod the same failed course isn't going to pull us out of the rut, TA. Not all past government programs were failures, but not all were successes, either. We need to examine the programs, find the ones that were effective, and use them as a model. We need to re-introduce the idea of civic responsibility, and start using human resources instead of just monetary ones.

Some of the specifics I envision: The aforementioned mentoring programs, cooperative day care, using federal financial aid recipients from colleges in summer internships to offset the cost of personnel, bringing back the Victory Gardens in impoverished areas, for environmental and aesthetic reasons as well as providing food in the communities, granting communities charters to explore cooperative community models. In short, putting power back in the hands of the people and removing it from the cesspool on the Potomac.

The federal government serves some definite purposes, purposes that are clearly outlined in the Constitution. But the seat of power in the US has always been meant to rest in the hands of the people, and we have sadly abdicated the throne.

you must not have been reading genes posts. that is all he calls for is raising taxes.

we dont disagree on that. Some politicians do that for sure. but i am talking about us
not politicians. We can get them to stop their nonsense and run the Gov properly if we concentrate on that and not argue about cutting taxes. The problem is this: these corrupt politicians will get their pork no matter how little money the gov has. let's fix it not starve it.

Thieves never starve .... others do.



it was a temporary provision ... what is the logic of making it permanent? arent we in the middle of a war? dont we have enough debt?

comon Gid. you are a reasonable man .... is it really a good idea to continue that tax cut with things the way you see them now? and who is being affected? the top 1% of the people? we are in a war for God's sake !!!! that doesnt require a return to the origibal tax code not even raising it? if the war doesnt require that, so what does?

This is my point with you Gid. ... good ideas but wrong policies .... I wish you dont swallow what the Right feeds the unawares .... you are better than that.



That is exactly my objectives too. so let's talk about that not about how stupid the dems are, how they are bleeding hearts with no action ..etc of the smoking mirrors that hides deciet and dishonesty.

Do you see any of the Rep candidates talking about that? not a word

ALl three top Dem candidates talk about it .... and what do you do? attack them and support the Rep. .... that surprises me.

non of the dems is talking about raising taxes while all Rep are talking about cutting taxes ... and where do you get the money to support a useless war? eliminate the SS, medicare ...etc. Is that what You support? from what you write , i believe so. please correct me if i am wrong in that.

Now you talking .... but that is not what you always write about. Please keep talking about that.... let's get it right and dont let the deciet and dishonesty divert you from that.

yes i have. but he is not the rest of the people .... let's not allow the extremes to divert our attentions from what has to be done.

you really think I or any working person like to or want to raise taxes????? what kind of thinking is that? i personally wish we can do things with no taxes .... i can and need that extra income. but there are things we hate to do and try to avoid doing them but we know that we have to do them for our own best interest. taxes are on the top of that list .... followed by going to the dentist .... like me going next week and i am thinking about it NOW .... how painful and hateful is that you think? but i have to do it .... taxes are even more painful .... but ... as terrible as it can get they are still a necessity.

so your saying that gene is a no body.

when someone says no one and i really mean no one. that includes the extremes.

you really funny ... Gene is a good man with ideas .... i dont think he likes taxes either. i dont think anyone likes taxes. but you just dont read what he says without bias. you like Bush, he hates Bush and that is the problem between him and most of the gang around here.

I feel sorry for Bush. I dont hate him. but Gene hates him. This doesnt make what he says wrong or gives me or any one the right to distort what he says. I dont agree with him on everything but i dont think he likes or want more taxes.

In any case. When we all discuss anything here, it is a given we are not talking about exteme ideologies. At least i assume that. it is nuts to write things for discussion if it is something that is far out of the main stream thinking.

distort what he says.


the rich can afford to pay more in taxes. how is the distorting


and everyone with a brain knows that the rich don't pay taxes. because they pass it on to their customers.

I disagree as well. But I will go so far as to say SOME who CLAIM to be on the right love it as well. Face it, Money is power. Pure and simple. More money means more power. The reason the left is branded with this narcissism is that they have never met a program they do not like. Even failed ones.