[Cog]

Time for some austerity. We can't afford to extend the government teat to the mooch class anymore.

The Mooch class:

Government workers at all levels
Anyone collecting food stamps
Anyone collecting social security and/or medicare
Anyone I don't particular care for
Criminals
Anyone in the military
Military contractors

The way I see it, after we cut out the entitlements for the above people, we will have plenty of dough to keep in our own pockets.

[Lore]

Time for some austerity. We can't afford to extend the government teat to the mooch class anymore.

The Mooch class:

Government workers at all levels
Anyone collecting food stamps
Anyone collecting social security and/or medicare
Anyone I don't particular care for
Criminals
Anyone in the military
Military contractors

The way I see it, after we cut out the entitlements for the above people, we will have plenty of dough to keep in our own pockets.

It's pretty obvious, and gladly so, most people don't see it the way you do. Faciest ideas that many a despot has tried.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Time for some austerity. We can't afford to extend the government teat to the mooch class anymore.

The Mooch class:

Government workers at all levels
Anyone collecting food stamps
Anyone collecting social security and/or medicare
Anyone I don't particular care for
Criminals
Anyone in the military
Military contractors

The way I see it, after we cut out the entitlements for the above people, we will have plenty of dough to keep in our own pockets.

With the "anyone I don't particularly care for" line, I assume this is at least partly sarcastic?

If not, no problem. I'm just curious.

If not, are you an anarchist by chance? For example, even most libertarians believe we need SOME military and SOME (small) government, such as a court system, a police force -- stuff like that.

And if it isn't sarcastic, it's a nice contrast to the "we must take care of everybody all the time because they NEED it" viewpoint we get treated to almost constantly, so kudos either way.

[Pops]

Let's not forget slackers who take the homeowners interest deduction or whose income tax is deferred on an IRA, or write off use of a personal car or home office, and lets not forget those freeloaders who receive compensation in the form of employer provided health insurance but pay no tax on it's value and ...

[Cog]

I think you will find that my views are solidly Libertarian. I do not like government much and find that the larger it grows the more invasive it becomes in our lives. I don't mind a military force large enough to protect our country and I have found that the abusive cops tend to be small in number. You know you have reached government critical mass when you have enough government around to bust people for selling raw milk and fining people who want to grow some veggies. Not even to mention, the millions we have sent to jail for the "Crime" of wanting to smoke some weed.

But make no mistake about it. Large governments, even those that mean well, are destructive towards individual self-reliance and personal liberty. I don't want you to take care of me and I damn sure don't want to take care of you. Just leave me be to conduct my affairs with minimal interaction from the government and I will be quite happy.

[Cog]

Let's not forget slackers who take the homeowners interest deduction or whose income tax is deferred on an IRA, or write off use of a personal car or home office, and lets not forget those freeloaders who receive compensation in the form of employer provided health insurance but pay no tax on it's value and ...

Pops has never met a tax he didn't embrace as long as the mooch class benefits in some way.

[Pops]

Let's not forget slackers who take the homeowners interest deduction or whose income tax is deferred on an IRA, or write off use of a personal car or home office, and lets not forget those freeloaders who receive compensation in the form of employer provided health insurance but pay no tax on it's value and ...

Pops has never met a tax he didn't embrace as long as the mooch class benefits in some way.

What, did I step on your toe?
You mean took the mortgage interest deduction?
Didn't pay taxes on the value of your health insurance?

Someone has to make up for the handouts you suck up from the government.

Where else are you a closet mooch?

[Cog]

You are under the mistaken impression the fruits of my labors belong to someone else besides me. Thus, I dub thee Defender of the Mooch Class with Oak Leaf Cluster.

[Lore]

I think you will find that my views are solidly Libertarian. I do not like government much and find that the larger it grows the more invasive it becomes in our lives. I don't mind a military force large enough to protect our country and I have found that the abusive cops tend to be small in number. You know you have reached government critical mass when you have enough government around to bust people for selling raw milk and fining people who want to grow some veggies. Not even to mention, the millions we have sent to jail for the "Crime" of wanting to smoke some weed.

But make no mistake about it. Large governments, even those that mean well, are destructive towards individual self-reliance and personal liberty. I don't want you to take care of me and I damn sure don't want to take care of you. Just leave me be to conduct my affairs with minimal interaction from the government and I will be quite happy.

Which goes to say, your views are solidly out of the mainstream of the majority of the populace and therefore does not represent their interest.

You’re welcome to your libertarian opinion, that is your right, and one which I would defend. It’s only when such contrarian ideology steps over the line of dangerous political enforcement against the benefit of good citizens that bothers me.

[Pops]

You are under the mistaken impression the fruits of my labors belong to someone else besides me. Thus, I dub thee Defender of the Mooch Class with Oak Leaf Cluster.

And you are under the quite common misconception that the "fruits" are yours due to your labor and not your luck.

Born on third and think you hit a triple.

[Cog]

I think you will find that my views are solidly Libertarian. I do not like government much and find that the larger it grows the more invasive it becomes in our lives. I don't mind a military force large enough to protect our country and I have found that the abusive cops tend to be small in number. You know you have reached government critical mass when you have enough government around to bust people for selling raw milk and fining people who want to grow some veggies. Not even to mention, the millions we have sent to jail for the "Crime" of wanting to smoke some weed.

But make no mistake about it. Large governments, even those that mean well, are destructive towards individual self-reliance and personal liberty. I don't want you to take care of me and I damn sure don't want to take care of you. Just leave me be to conduct my affairs with minimal interaction from the government and I will be quite happy.

Which goes to say, your views are solidly out of the mainstream of the majority of the populace and therefore does not represent their interest.

You’re welcome to your libertarian opinion, that is your right, and one which I would defend. It’s only when such contrarian ideology steps over the line of dangerous political enforcement against the benefit of good citizens that bothers me.

I'm not trying to represent mainsteam interests. Most of the country have not a clue how dire the situation is with our fiscal problems and would deny that peak oil is a reality. Watching American Idol is about as much intellectual challenge as they can handle. I don't think not joining a group of idiots as they run toward the cliff makes me an extremist.

The greatest benefit to the citizens of this country would be to have the smallest government possible. People will, if left alone, usually find a way to feed and clothe themselves. Call it a built-in survival mechanism. All this progressive thinking has done for us, is to create a large group of people who can not manage their own economic lifestyle but think its just fine to steal my money by using the power of government. You will have to forgive me for not opening my wallet to them.

[Cog]

You are under the mistaken impression the fruits of my labors belong to someone else besides me. Thus, I dub thee Defender of the Mooch Class with Oak Leaf Cluster.

And you are under the quite common misconception that the "fruits" are yours due to your labor and not your luck.

Born on third and think you hit a triple.

Oh please. More of the entitlement mentality. "Booh Hoo, I never got any breaks as a kid so I guess you owe me the fruits of you labors."

Your post is reflective of the entire mooch thinking going on in the USA and should be enshrined for future generations to read as a warning.

[Lore]

I'm not trying to represent mainsteam interests. Most of the country have not a clue how dire the situation is with our fiscal problems and would deny that peak oil is a reality. Watching American Idol is about as much intellectual challenge as they can handle. I don't think not joining a group of idiots as they run toward the cliff makes me an extremist.

No argument here.

The greatest benefit to the citizens of this country would be to have the smallest government possible. People will, if left alone, usually find a way to feed and clothe themselves. Call it a built-in survival mechanism. All this progressive thinking has done for us, is to create a large group of people who can not manage their own economic lifestyle but think its just fine to steal my money by using the power of government. You will have to forgive me for not opening my wallet to them.

People, by nature are social animals and by definition will never stay alone or be left alone. Therefore you need mechanisms to deal with it.

People in Finland are quite happy, even as some polls say some of the happiest in the world, to open their wallets. Therefore the facts run contrary to your opinion.

[Cog]

The world is not Finland. If you think they have a superior system, then you are wasting valuable time living here. Progressives just can't understand that Peak Oil ends this experiment in cradle to grave socialism. Think local not national and you will have a clue to where this is headed. We don't do our countrymen any favors by kicking the can down the road yet again.

Accept the pain of a smaller government now, in stages, and make the adjustments or get ready to lose all your social programs down the road in a economic crash. Hey if that is the solution you guys want, don't say you haven't been warned by the Libertarians of where this is headed.

[Lore]

The world is not Finland. If you think they have a superior system, then you are wasting valuable time living here. Progressives just can't understand that Peak Oil ends this experiment in cradle to grave socialism. Think local not national and you will have a clue to where this is headed. We don't do our countrymen any favors by kicking the can down the road yet again.

I like it here, I'm not the one complaining about it. Local is tribal, and has its own set of problems.

Accept the pain of a smaller government now, in stages, and make the adjustments or get ready to lose all your social programs down the road in a economic crash. Hey if that is the solution you guys want, don't say you haven't been warned by the Libertarians of where this is headed.

Smaller government will only come about when there are smaller numbers of people; accept that. There is no longer a wilderness to run to so you can play Daniel Boone anymore. To be honest, very few people care what true libertarians have to say, because in the end the philosophy does not match up with their own, or will it ever.

[AgentR11]

Problem with this generally silly term "mooch" is that its meaningless, yet mean.

There is level of infrastructure and integration that the government is involved in; we use scribbles on paper that are worth nothing outside of the value assigned to it by government (directly or indirectly); to engage in any sort of commerce we move things by land or sea, and can do so as a result of government action on our behalf. So there's no avoiding, in a normal life, some things which are the product of government spending the wealth of its people on their behalf for their common use.

At the other end, are social contract things paid by the people to others who will not or can not work for their own, or produce enough value to feed themselves. I think we mostly all agree, that the 60 IQ fellow, with a gimpy leg and not great eyesight is less expensive to us all if we can find a way for him to avoid starvation, and live in some type of shelter operating within the normal economic system. If you force him to crime to avoid starvation, someone will get hurt, or die, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in recovery costs, as well as more hundreds of thousands in the process of punishing the guy, who likely doesn't even realize he's being punished.

Ok, so there are valid social contract expenditures of government. Where do we draw the line of valid expenditures? That's the question that has to be confronted, but that everyone is afraid to confront, because it involves saying "NO" to some people, and perhaps to people who have only heard "YES" up until now. There is no way to make those decisions not suck.

My personal take on the thing is for anyone able to work that is drawing government assistance, they need to be doing so in the form of a government work program, where in all cases, any paying civilian job, of any type, would be a drastic improvement in dollars vs effort calculation. I don't even care if its carrying half pound rocks back and forth on a football field. For an able bodied person, no labor = no money. Better if you get some social good out of the labor, of course. And that takes you to disability. YUCK! See how this gets out of control, and impossible to fix well? And what about the elderly, to old to safely walk back and forth on the football field? So we are where we are.

We are unwilling to say no, and we are unable to keep paying as we are. In the end, we've decided by default, to let mathematics say NO. As Ron Paul put it; you'll get your SS check, your Medicaid, your bond payment, but you'll be lucky to be able to afford a loaf of bread with it.

Sad thing is, math is a much more cruel answer, than if we took it upon ourselves to say "no" to those who can survive having someone say "no" to them.

[Lore]

Sad thing is, math is a much more cruel answer, than if we took it upon ourselves to say "no" to those who can survive having someone say "no" to them.

You not only have to say no, you have to say pay up.

[vision-master]

Problem with this generally silly term "mooch" is that its meaningless, yet mean.

There is level of infrastructure and integration that the government is involved in; we use scribbles on paper that are worth nothing outside of the value assigned to it by government (directly or indirectly); to engage in any sort of commerce we move things by land or sea, and can do so as a result of government action on our behalf. So there's no avoiding, in a normal life, some things which are the product of government spending the wealth of its people on their behalf for their common use.

At the other end, are social contract things paid by the people to others who will not or can not work for their own, or produce enough value to feed themselves. I think we mostly all agree, that the 60 IQ fellow, with a gimpy leg and not great eyesight is less expensive to us all if we can find a way for him to avoid starvation, and live in some type of shelter operating within the normal economic system. If you force him to crime to avoid starvation, someone will get hurt, or die, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in recovery costs, as well as more hundreds of thousands in the process of punishing the guy, who likely doesn't even realize he's being punished.

Ok, so there are valid social contract expenditures of government. Where do we draw the line of valid expenditures? That's the question that has to be confronted, but that everyone is afraid to confront, because it involves saying "NO" to some people, and perhaps to people who have only heard "YES" up until now. There is no way to make those decisions not suck.

My personal take on the thing is for anyone able to work that is drawing government assistance, they need to be doing so in the form of a government work program, where in all cases, any paying civilian job, of any type, would be a drastic improvement in dollars vs effort calculation. I don't even care if its carrying half pound rocks back and forth on a football field. For an able bodied person, no labor = no money. Better if you get some social good out of the labor, of course. And that takes you to disability. YUCK! See how this gets out of control, and impossible to fix well? And what about the elderly, to old to safely walk back and forth on the football field? So we are where we are.

We are unwilling to say no, and we are unable to keep paying as we are. In the end, we've decided by default, to let mathematics say NO. As Ron Paul put it; you'll get your SS check, your Medicaid, your bond payment, but you'll be lucky to be able to afford a loaf of bread with it.

Sad thing is, math is a much more cruel answer, than if we took it upon ourselves to say "no" to those who can survive having someone say "no" to them.

Do you lack love?

The path to Love

Worry for others

Pray for everyone

Listen to those who YOU have cast away

Forgive your transgressors

Work towards a brighter future

vm

[Pops]

Agent, in an age of Dittoheads you are the most reasonable conservative I know. Sorry I compared you to Brooks, who I now know is a Socialist by comparison but that fact make you even more like Brooks in my book.

Where do we draw the line of valid expenditures?

You're right, we don't draw the line, both camps compromise by giving the other their every demand, less taxes and more spending.

[Cog]

Agent, in an age of Dittoheads you are the most reasonable conservative I know. Sorry I compared you to Brooks, who I now know is a Socialist by comparison but that fact make you even more like Brooks in my book.

Where do we draw the line of valid expenditures?

You're right, we don't draw the line, both camps compromise by giving the other their every demand, less taxes and more spending.

Raising taxes is just an excuse to not cut spending. Give me the cuts first, you can have your taxes later. Lets try that and see if that doesn't work a hell of a lot better than the opposite. Or we can just print and borrow and see how long it takes for the national debt to detonate. Which seems to be the current plan in the Senate.

I'm sorry life is unfair in that we can't change the math of the situation to suit your need to supply the mooch class with ever increasing outlays. But if you can find a way to make 2+2= something other than 4, I'll be all about supporting it.