Originally Posted by Tbugs

Richie,

Is everything that is posted contrary to your viewpoint a "liberal ridicule" attack?

Bugs, you're one guy I think who's not an idiot. Reread Xavier's and Actor's last couple of posts as they name people with their intention to convey that these people are ridiculous, or as "to be held to ridicule". Come on man, it's too obvious. Seriously.

Richie,

You know that I just get my jollies by a lot of my postings. Glad to know you do not think I am an idiot. My wife would disagree with you at times.

The golf course is calling me this afternoon and Urban Flats for dinner. Have a great day.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

Bugs, you're one guy I think who's not an idiot. Reread Xavier's and Actor's last couple of posts as they name people with their intention to convey that these people are ridiculous, or as "to be held to ridicule". Come on man, it's too obvious. Seriously.

Now Richie, the polite words would be: "He suffers from "IDTenT" error syndrome."

Take your time, it'll come to you.

Xavier

Richie, you have consistently taken what you call a "conservative" viewpoint. And whether you think so or not, in fact you have been quite critical, even demeaning, of people who don't share your beliefs. Another poster here put is succinctly...

"...is everything that is posted contrary to your viewpoint a "liberal ridicule" attack?"

But the back-and-forth difference of opinion makes me wonder where on the wide political array I stand...in your mind anyway. Here's some things that are important to me...

• We need to cut federal spending and cut it NOW. That includes all the categories of spending that even the Tea Partiers seem to avoid speaking to...Social Security, Medicare and defense spending, probably all in a pretty big way.

• Spending cuts should be aimed at balancing annual federal budgets within three years, not ten or more.

• Revenues (taxes) need to be increased. The wealthy should pay more. Corporate loopholes should be eliminated. Maybe overseas corporate earnings should be taxed. Maybe there should be a VAT tax. I would propose legislation that every single dollar of tax increases go towards reduction of the national debt. That is, incremental revenues from tax increases should NOT be placed in the general fund for use in funding deficit spending by Congress.

• At the same time we need to cut federal spending, that which we do spend needs to be done more wisely. There should be increases in some spending--education and economic infrastructure as an example--while other social programs, unemployment benefits, duplicative programs and departments, should be cut. The kinds of cuts I'm suggesting aren't incremental single digit percentage cuts. We probably have to be thinking along the lines of eliminating entire departments of the federal government!

• Every American--100% of all citizens, but not illegals--should have quality health insurance, funded by the government without a profit incentive built-in. The only way that can happen is by achieving a "payment for results" system rather than "payment for service". That can only be accomplished if there is a single payer for healthcare insurance claims. There's no chance that a long list of profit-motivated insurance companies can accomplish that on a coordinated basis.

• Federal legislation must be designed that, at the same time every American has quality healthcare, the actual cost of healthcare in the U.S. must be reduced--or at least the rate of inflation stopped. This means that many healthcare providers will make less money or be less profitable. Maybe the whole concept of payment for service--by anyone, public or private--needs to be eliminated. Unnecessary and duplicative tests have to become the responsibility of the individual. End-of-life treatments must be severely limited. Changes like that--big changes. Healthcare providers that are effective and competitive will survive; those that aren't won't. And most of the providers will make a lot less money than they do now, more in line with providers are paid in the other developed countries of the world.

Unfortunately, I don't believe that any of this can be accomplished by a heavily lobbied Congress that operates on a short-term election cycle. Some other form of governmental action will be required. Maybe Congress has to authorize and enable a series of commissions that will operate independent of the elected politicians to come up with a long-term plan to accomplish what I've suggested, with no input or control by the Congress. Does that vary from the form of government designed by the framers? Yes. But I don't believe for an instant that were the framers of our Constitution and system of government to return today, that they would embrace and support what our government has become.

So, Richie, when you take the side of the conservatives and happily castigate the liberals, how would you deal with me? What am I? A conservative? Partly. A liberal? Somewhat. Someone totally invested in the concept that our form of government is effective or will be effective in the future? Not for a minute.

So are my feelings and beliefs a "liberal ridicule attack" on conservatism? Or something else? If not a conservative or a liberal, other than being an idealist, what am I? How are you going to deal with me? Shallow ridicule won't work.

VK, I can't believe I would have to explain this to you but, no, you do not belong in the (politely put) less than substantive "liberal ridicule" group as you always, whether I fully agree with you or not, have reasoned (and long) answers.

I'm speaking about the people who in response to any post by a conservative engage in mocking the poster and the conservative personalities mentioned (or not mentioned, such as Sarah Palin who is brought up no matter what the subject) and without any thoughtful comment on the subject at hand.

I don't necessarily "castigate liberals", because they're liberals; I call out the ones on this post for their less than brilliant (to put it politely again) comments on the subject at hand (as in, non-existant) and the then usual shot at me.

I still am having a hard time believing I have to explain this to you, unless you're only reading my posts in response to the childish and unreasoned posts taking personal shots at me and not reading the posts I'm addressing.

I'm not going to take the time to answer the political and economic questions you asked, as I am a bit put off by this post of yours criticizing me and not addressing the obvious reasons, if you read them, for my prior umbrage.