Virgina Kruta - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

davidmash · #1 08-02-2018, 08:51 PM

Quote:

But then Ocasio-Cortez spoke, followed by Bush, and I saw something truly terrifying. I saw just how easy it would be, were I less involved and less certain of our nation’s founding and its history, to fall for the populist lines they were shouting from that stage.

I saw how easy it would be, as a parent, to accept the idea that my children deserve healthcare and education.
I saw how easy it would be, as someone who has struggled to make ends meet, to accept the idea that a “living wage” was a human right.
Above all, I saw how easy it would be to accept the notion that it was the government’s job to make sure that those things were provided.

So is she saying that her kids do not deserve education or health care? A living wage? I guess I am missing the part about how these things are bad?

I’m A Conservative, And I Went To An Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Rally | The Daily Caller

t walgamuth · #2 08-02-2018, 11:08 PM

So Virginia does not believe our children deserve good health, education, and to have enough to eat? ....the wealthiest country in the world cannot do these things?

Of course we can if we make it a priority.

rocky raccoon · #3 08-03-2018, 06:46 AM

I think that she believes that such things are best attained by self realization rather than a government handout. There seems to be a persistent belief among Liberals that government funds are bottomless and are somehow just there for all to draw from.

The fact is that you Tom, David and I provide those funds through taxes. You may think that it is a good thing for all of us that are fund provider's to pay a little more so that fund takers can live better. Basic economics does not support that because for every new taker added, there is one new provider lost. Eventually the Take will exceed the Put. Such a system can work for a while in low-population countries but even there the bill will someday come due.

This is compounded today by encouraging low/no income producing immigration with subsequent loss of tax income to the government for simply political purposes.

t walgamuth · #4 08-03-2018, 08:27 AM

No, she feels rich and entitled and poor people should just be left out.

strelnik · #5 08-03-2018, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

No, she feels rich and entitled and poor people should just be left out.

Tom, I'm very confused by your last statement:
" No, she feels rich and entitled and poor people should just be left out."

So both rich AND poor should be left out???

Pls clarify.

Plus the article itself went all over the map.

I would edit and rewrite it but I'm busy these days.

t walgamuth · #6 08-03-2018, 01:16 PM

No, she feels rich and can afford all the things mentioned. If you cannot, too bad. She deserves this because she is intelligent and hard working, not a welfare mope.

davidmash · #7 08-03-2018, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rocky raccoon

I think that she believes that such things are best attained by self realization rather than a government handout. There seems to be a persistent belief among Liberals that government funds are bottomless and are somehow just there for all to draw from.

The fact is that you Tom, David and I provide those funds through taxes. You may think that it is a good thing for all of us that are fund provider's to pay a little more so that fund takers can live better. Basic economics does not support that because for every new taker added, there is one new provider lost. Eventually the Take will exceed the Put. Such a system can work for a while in low-population countries but even there the bill will someday come due.

This is compounded today by encouraging low/no income producing immigration with subsequent loss of tax income to the government for simply political purposes.

I think it does benefit. In terms of education, an educated populace does benefit all of us. They become the providers as opposed to takers.

In terms of health care, unless you intend to turn away those who cannot pay for care, it is a heck of a lot cheaper to pay for preventative health care than emergency care.

rocky raccoon · #8 08-03-2018, 01:55 PM

I may disagree with your health care statement above.

I do not believe it is cheaper to pay for emergency care for few, than preventive care for all.

Botnst · #9 08-03-2018, 01:55 PM

wrong forum.

just sayin'.

davidmash · #10 08-03-2018, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

wrong forum.

just sayin'.

I asked it to be moved but no luck.so far.

davidmash · #11 08-03-2018, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rocky raccoon

I may disagree with your health care statement above.

I do not believe it is cheaper to pay for emergency care for few, than preventive care for all.

There associate cost with health care that increase the expenditures, biggest of which is loss of work.

martureo · #12 08-04-2018, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rocky raccoon

I think that she believes that such things are best attained by self realization rather than a government handout. There seems to be a persistent belief among Liberals that government funds are bottomless and are somehow just there for all to draw from.

The fact is that you Tom, David and I provide those funds through taxes. You may think that it is a good thing for all of us that are fund provider's to pay a little more so that fund takers can live better. Basic economics does not support that because for every new taker added, there is one new provider lost. Eventually the Take will exceed the Put. Such a system can work for a while in low-population countries but even there the bill will someday come due.

This is compounded today by encouraging low/no income producing immigration with subsequent loss of tax income to the government for simply political purposes.

You believe that individuals should be paying for their own children's healthcare and education rather than by the government? How has that been working? How many years have we had a public school system and how many years have there still been underfunded schools and lack of resources for poorer areas? How many children are still without healthcare?

Seems like the individually funded option only really works for those who can afford it.

As for the accusation that "liberals" think that "government funds are bottomless," that's not true. "Liberals" tend to think that things cost less if everyone pays for them. Turns out the Koch brothers own Libertarian think tank the Mercatus Institute just confirmed that Bernie's idea of medicare for all IS actually much cheaper than what we've had for decades.

And as for the taker/put-er comments, you're out of touch. Right now the takers are going to be the older generation and the put-ers are the younger generation, but our population is shrinking.

Further, lowering the cost of healthcare means that individuals have more money for other things, which means higher tax revenue. Canada operates this way very effectively.

t walgamuth · #13 08-04-2018, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

You believe that individuals should be paying for their own children's healthcare and education rather than by the government? How has that been working? How many years have we had a public school system and how many years have there still been underfunded schools and lack of resources for poorer areas? How many children are still without healthcare?

Seems like the individually funded option only really works for those who can afford it.

As for the accusation that "liberals" think that "government funds are bottomless," that's not true. "Liberals" tend to think that things cost less if everyone pays for them. Turns out the Koch brothers own Libertarian think tank the Mercatus Institute just confirmed that Bernie's idea of medicare for all IS actually much cheaper than what we've had for decades.

And as for the taker/put-er comments, you're out of touch. Right now the takers are going to be the older generation and the put-ers are the younger generation, but our population is shrinking.

Further, lowering the cost of healthcare means that individuals have more money for other things, which means higher tax revenue. Canada operates this way very effectively.

You make excellent points my friend!