2014***ObamaCare***2014

DonDiego has often referred to himself as "poor, old DonDiego" before Chilcoot arrived within the LVA Fora. He will continue to do so at his whim.

I would never agree to such a thing. It would require me to believe all the worlds problems can be solved in a Free Market with little influence from a public sector. My awareness and education in history is much too established to embrace such a philosophy. That same awareness has taught me that good and bad policy manifests itself in all forms. Which is why the "big government" vs "small government" debate really isn't resolved by history....the argument of "smart government" vs "dumb government" is. (I also suspect this is why most Republicans only embrace the "small government" philosophy when they are out of power.)


Examples of good vs bad government:

Good Public Infrastructure: The Hoover Dam, National Highways
Bad Public Infrastructure: The Las Vegas Monorail, The Bridge to Nowhere

Good R&D Grants: The Internet, Cancer treatment
Bad R&D Grants: The Spruce Goose

Good Tax cut: Incomes to working people
Bad Tax Cut: companies who outsource jobs

Good Entitlement : Paid for Obamacare
Bad ENtitlement : Unpaid for Medicare Part D

Good War: World War 2
Bad War: Iraq

Good Regulations: Food, Prescription Drugs, Vehicles, Drinking Water safety, nuclear waste
Bad Regulations: Jim Crowe Laws

Good Deregulations: telephone communication, alcohol
Bad Deregulations: investment banking, coal mines

None of pjstroh's examples address DonDiego's objection to: " [any] transfer of money to anyone to influence [his] behavior or redistribute wealth as opposed to purchase goods/services for legitimate Government use ".

DonDiego would prefer a world of smart, limited Government, with expanded personal responsibility; pjstroh prefers a smart, expansive Government, with limited personal responsibility.
The reader, if any, may decide what the world actually is.
If/When things go wrong, . . . and things do go wrong, . . . the damage is more limited in DonDiego's world. e.g. Right now the expansive coalition of the Government and the Central Bank has way too much influence on the economy; interest rates are artificially low; stock prices are artificially high. Unless a legitimate market for debt, especially US Federal debt, can be restored something big may well go wrong.

Just judging some Government Programs/Activities good and others bad does not address the philosophy behind distributing subsidies and welfare/entitlements.

Public Infrastructure is a legitimate function of Government. [i. Some will be good; some will not; citizens may disagree.]

R&D is a legitimate function of Government. [see i. above; the Internet was an in-house DOD project with contracted assistance; the Spruce Goose was the purchase of an experimental aircraft.]

Tax Cuts. As legitimate as taxes themselves. [see i. above DonDiego suggests they should not be used to influence behavior, just to fund the Government - that's what started this dialogue.]

Entitlements. DonDiego questions the legitimacy of taking from someone to give to someone else; DonDiego suspects pjstroh disagrees. [Nothing should pass without funding. Too early to call Obamacare paid for.]

War. Establishment of the War Department in 1789 established legitimacy. [see i. above]

Regulations/Deregulations. Again, legitimate. [see i. above]

Just having a little fun with HTML. Here's the real headline:

Republicans were for incentivizing early retirement before they were against it:

Nowhere in forky's quote does it talk about working less hours

PJ, I find your position interesting. You wrote " It would require me to believe all the worlds problems can be solved in a Free Market with little influence from a public sector."

Most importantly, all the World's problems can not be solved. Government can solve some problems, yet it causes more problems than it cures. In fact, an over involved government can (and has) become a net drag on the quality of life. 99% of most problems are best hashed out without government involvement. That includes subsidizing the able bodied poor.

“By providing heavily subsidized health insurance to people with very low income and then withdrawing those subsidies as income rises, the act creates a disincentive for people to work relative to what would have been the case in the absence of that act.”
__ CBO Director Doug Elmendorf, 5 February 2014

Say what? They now opposse policy they previously endorsed? I guess there's a first time for everything

Nowhere in the article forky posted does it say that