[MD] Barfuesserkirche (ZMM & Dewey)

[Case]

Gene,

I apologize profusely. I can imagine how upset I would be to see my name
associated with comments like those. I sincerely beg your pardon.

Abashedly yours,
Case

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Gene M
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 10:13 PM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Barfuesserkirche (ZMM & Dewey)

Please don't attach my name to things I didn't say Case...

Those were Craig's comments, not mine.

-Gene

On 10/24/06, Case <Case at ispots.com> wrote:
>
> [Arlo]
> > Case suggested a while back ""Throwing more money at the problem isn't
> the
>
> > answer" is one of the most asinine political statements ever uttered.
>
> [Gene]
> Generally, you get what you pay for.  But paradoxically, throwing more
> money
> at a problem can be counter-productive when:
> 1) It creates special-interests (public & private) that ensure the problem
> doesn't get solved & dry up their flow of revenue/power.
> 2) It discourages those who provide the money from continuing to try to
> solve the problem.
> 3) It diverts resources from more important problems.
> 4) It creates waste & unaccountability.
>
> [Case]
> And even more generally speaking you don't get what you don't pay for.
>
> 1) Special interests? Where the hell is George Lakof? When did
> non-profits,
> schools, environmentalist and anyone seeking the common good become
> labeled
> a "special interest." Special interests are private parties seeking to
> promote their own interests at public expense whether that is a direct
> subsidy from the government or through a looting or desecration of public
> resources.
>
> 2) Most of the problems that receive public funding are ones that are
> either
> too large for private interests or ones that do not lend themselves to the
> profit motive. Homelessness is one example. The only organizations seeking
> to solve that problem are doing so because the believe God is telling them
> to do it.
>
> 3) If important problems are being neglected it is because right wingers
> spouting pretentious nonsense have convinced people that spending money in
> the public interest is not in their interest. The special interest double
> speak you spewed above is a shining example.
>
> 4) You clearly haven't the slightest clue how public funding is
> administered. The most wasteful thing about the process is all the effort
> that goes into accounting for how the money is spent. Agencies that
> receive
> grants have to account for every dime. In contrast private companies
> don't'
> have to account for diddly.
>
> [Arlo]
> > You also seem to suggest that funding education for children whose
> parents
>
> > are poor is wrong. What is the alternative? A pauper class? Send 'em
> > straight to the sweatshops?
>
> [Gene]
> Appropriately, the first, alternative step is education.
>
> [Case]
> As long as it is delivered on the cheap.
>
> [Gene]
> Prospective parents should be educated that raising & paying for a child
> is
> their responsibility, not an entitlement from the state.
> This has 2 important consequences:  a) parents will budget for education
> (like they do for a new car) & not blithely perpetuate a pauper class & b)
> parents will become more involved/invested in their children's
> education--like Penn State profs & the Oakridge Boys.
>
> [Case]
> And if they don't listen maybe we should just take it out on the shiftless
> little bastards that spring from their worthless loins.
>
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
moq_discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/