Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GPS Info who wrote (205503)	10/10/2006 6:27:50 PM
From: geode00	Respond to of 281500

Auntie GPS, I think we are having a disagreement about the word governance. We may also be having a different disagreement about the concept of extremism. Hard to tell at this point. I am looking at governance from the POV of the country, of its citizens. I do not think anyone would consider good governance to be the wholesale looting of the US Treasury, losing wars of choice, record fiscal and trade deficits, etc. I see governance as being wholly different from government officials lining their own pockets and codifying their hold on power. Just because someone IS the government doesn't mean they are governing. I don't think Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz/et al play by the same playbook. Rumor is that Wolfowitz wanted to flood the world with cheap Iraq oil, bankrupt OPEC and make the world safe for Israel...or something like that. That would be 180 degrees in the opposite direction from the Saudis, the bin Ladens, the Bushes and assorted cronies. So, do you not think they are fascists? I think these aren't just the right-leaning side of the traditional cloth-coat Republican party. I think these are extremists beyond anything most Americans could even dream of. Also, what farm subsidy post? Finally, fired from what? Maurice made fun of the deaths of American troops. That's pretty much my last straw.

To: GPS Info who wrote (205503)	10/10/2006 8:49:58 PM
From: neolib	Respond to of 281500

To Republicans, “welfare” only refers to money that goes to the poorest or neediest Americans, and it does not refer to tax cuts or expanded deductions that go to wealthy individuals. When farm subsidies went to small farms, that was “welfare,” but the money going to agribusiness is not – IN THEIR VIEW. Many farm subsidies are outright payments of $, they are not tax cuts or expanded deductions. That is what you are not correctly addressing. I find that Republicans are just as big of fans of welfare as the poor Dems are. It is simply a matter of who gets the money. Besides the outright price supports and subsidized insurance/disaster payments, the government pores a ton of money into all sorts of Ag education/promotion which the farmers aught to do themselves (as occurs in most other industries). It is welfare by any standard. Ag also remains one of the primary industries where the government supports significant trade barriers to protect the American producer from foreign competition. I call that welfare as well, (robbing from the consumer to help selected producers) but it involves a step of indirection which often confuses people.