Republicans Want New Congressional leadership

[Que]

Consider the economic effect of the last one.

Consider the economic effect of tort reform. I notice you didn't want to talk about your ox being gored.

Remove the economic drain that lawyers are on the GDP and watch it take off. Lawyers (as you know first hand) add not one single dime to GDP, but do add to the cost of all products and services. They merely take from one pocket, keep 33-50% for themselves and put a little in another pocket.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Consider the economic effect of tort reform.

Provide a cite for it.

Remove the economic drain that lawyers are on the GDP and watch it take off. Lawyers (as you know first hand) add not one single dime to GDP, but do add to the cost of all products and services. They merely take from one pocket, keep 33-50% for themselves and put a little in another pocket.

You could say the same about soldiers or firefighters or police officers -- what do they produce? Yet all agree they add to the GDP, and I have no doubt GDP also takes account of attorneys' revenues.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Consider the economic effect of tort reform. I notice you didn't want to talk about your ox being gored.

Remove the economic drain that lawyers are on the GDP and watch it take off. Lawyers (as you know first hand) add not one single dime to GDP, but do add to the cost of all products and services. They merely take from one pocket, keep 33-50% for themselves and put a little in another pocket.

What's that got to do with a 2 yr government shut down being a horrible fucking idea?

Love it...not getting anywhere? Just change the subject!

Fuck this board....

 

[Sean Renaud]

Consider the economic effect of tort reform. I notice you didn't want to talk about your ox being gored.

Remove the economic drain that lawyers are on the GDP and watch it take off. Lawyers (as you know first hand) add not one single dime to GDP, but do add to the cost of all products and services. They merely take from one pocket, keep 33-50% for themselves and put a little in another pocket.

Of course they add to the GDP unless you're making the argument that you have to create something physical for that.

 

[Que]

Of course they add to the GDP unless you're making the argument that you have to create something physical for that.

I am making an accounting argument. Every single dollar they earn comes from the balance sheet of some other entity or person. It is stirring money around exactly the same way as wall street except in some functions such as venture capitalism there is an increase due to interest earned. Same with banks, interest earned adds to gdp. Robbing peter to pay paul adds not one thin dime.

Paying a lawyer money to read and interpret gov't regs also adds nothing. It is an expense. GDP is the product. it is the money earned after expenses. Some expenses are someone else's productivity but not lawyers. Or accountants for that matter.

Neither are gov't bureaucrats. they are an expense, they are paid, but the money comes off the top to pay them, it is a wash.

You have to mine something, grow something build something, rent something, transport something, or create something of intellectual property that others will buy. If it doesn't create an asset, it is a drain.

 

[Que]

What's that got to do with a 2 yr government shut down being a horrible fucking idea?

Love it...not getting anywhere? Just change the subject!

Fuck this board....

Uh, no...Oreo changed the subject when he edited out my wish list item tort reform. I thought I would put it before him a little more prominently. To remind him that voting to take from others to give to the poor does not make him any less a drain on society.

And it isn't "shutting down the govt for 2 years" although I'd love that. What bill can you imagine Obama signing that helps this country that Republicans would ever offer him?

He got his way `100% the first 2 years and it accomplished more harm than good leading to the slowest recovery EVER. Not wanting more of that is progress.

 

[KingOrfeo]

"Tort reform" is dishonest and partisan bullshit. And the way I see it, personal-injury lawyers are valuable to society because we function as a sort of private negligence police. Supermarket managers know it is important to keep their floors clean because of possible slip-and-fall actions, manufacturers know they had damn well better test everything carefully before putting it on the market, doctors are careful to avoid committing malpractice (imagine how much damage they could do if they weren't -- you'll put anything in your body if a doctor prescribes it), and so on.

We probably don't have much deterrent effect on motor vehicle accidents, but, then, I can't imagine what would. Not even a death penalty for speeding would. Americans will drive, and some drivers will sometimes be careless idiots. But, at least with PI lawyers around, people injured by a driver's negligence can do something about it, like settle with the tortfeasor's insurance company or one's own uninsured-motorist carrier for enough money to cover medical bills and lost wages.

. . . Say, is that an ambulance siren? Please excuse me for a moment . . .

 

[Sean Renaud]

I am making an accounting argument. Every single dollar they earn comes from the balance sheet of some other entity or person. It is stirring money around exactly the same way as wall street except in some functions such as venture capitalism there is an increase due to interest earned. Same with banks, interest earned adds to gdp. Robbing peter to pay paul adds not one thin dime.

Paying a lawyer money to read and interpret gov't regs also adds nothing. It is an expense. GDP is the product. it is the money earned after expenses. Some expenses are someone else's productivity but not lawyers. Or accountants for that matter.

Neither are gov't bureaucrats. they are an expense, they are paid, but the money comes off the top to pay them, it is a wash.

You have to mine something, grow something build something, rent something, transport something, or create something of intellectual property that others will buy. If it doesn't create an asset, it is a drain.

Okay now you're just getting into technicalities that don't matter one bit. As if in the process of robbing Peter to pay Paul the lawyer doesn't by a shiny car that does add to the GDP or that Paul didn't spend the money and that's if you honestly believe it's theft if you maim me with a known flaw to your device and not something I deserve because you fucked up.

Paying a lawyer to read the regs ensures they are followed. And regs have to be taken on a case by case basis if they in the end are a net good.

Popular myth but blatantly untrue.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I am making an accounting argument. Every single dollar they earn comes from the balance sheet of some other entity or person. It is stirring money around exactly the same way as wall street except in some functions such as venture capitalism there is an increase due to interest earned. Same with banks, interest earned adds to gdp. Robbing peter to pay paul adds not one thin dime.

Paying a lawyer money to read and interpret gov't regs also adds nothing. It is an expense. GDP is the product. it is the money earned after expenses. Some expenses are someone else's productivity but not lawyers. Or accountants for that matter.

Neither are gov't bureaucrats. they are an expense, they are paid, but the money comes off the top to pay them, it is a wash.

You have to mine something, grow something build something, rent something, transport something, or create something of intellectual property that others will buy. If it doesn't create an asset, it is a drain.

Civil servants and bankers stockbrokers and "middlemen" are also wealth creators. There is nothing about what a factory worker does that makes his work any more real or wealth-creating than what a police officer does or what a retail-store manager does or what a fire-safety inspector does -- or what a PI attorney does. To say otherwise is to fall into the pseudoeconomic fallacy known as producerism -- the idea that only people who make things you can hold in your hands are producers of "real" wealth and all others are parasitic on them.

This kind of nonsense is actually very old in American populist thought. British conservative Paul Johnson commented in his A History of the American People:

The Founders, particularly the Virginians, Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, et al., equated property, as a moral force, with land. Their views were articulated by John Taylor (1753-1824), like them a Virginia landowner who served in the Senate and published in 1814 a monumental work of 700 pages, An Inquiry in the Principles and Policy of the United States. Taylor distinguished between 'natural' property. such as land, and 'artificial property' created by legal privilege, of which banking wealth was the outstanding example. He saw the right to issue paper money as indirect taxation on the people: 'Taxation, direct or indirect, produced by a paper system in any form, will rob a nation of property without giving it liberty; and by creating and enriching a separate interest, will rob it of liberty without giving it property.' Paper-money banking benefited an artificially created and parasitical financial aristocracy at the expense of the hard-working farmer, and this 'property-transferring policy invariably impoverishes all laboring and productive classes.' He compared this new financial power with the old feudal and ecclesiastical power, with the bankers using 'force, faith and credit' as the two others did religion and feudality. What particularly infuriated Taylor was the horrible slyness with which financiers had invested 'fictitious' property, such as bank-paper and stock, with all the prestige and virtues of 'honest' property.

Taylor's theory was an early version of what was to become known as the 'physical fallacy,' a belief that only those who worked with their hands and brains to raise food or make goods were creating 'real' wealth and that all other forms of economic activity were essentially parasitical. It was commonly held in the early 19th century, and Marx and all his followers fell victim to it. Indeed plenty of people hold it in one form or another today, and whenever its adherents acquire power, or seize it, and put their beliefs into practice, by oppressing the 'parasitical middleman,' poverty invariably follows. Taylor's formulation of this theory fell on particularly rich soil because American farmers in general, and the Southerners and backwoodsmen in particular, already had a paranoid suspicion of the 'money power' dating from colonial times, as we have seen. So Taylor's arguments, suitably vulgarized, became the common coin of the Jeffersonians, later of the Jacksonians and finally of silver-standard Democrats and populists of the late 19th century, who claimed that the American farmer was being 'crucified on a cross of gold.' The persistence of this fallacy in American politics refutes the common assumption that America is resistant to ideology, for if ever there were an ideology it is this farrago.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Uh, no...Oreo changed the subject when he edited out my wish list item tort reform. I thought I would put it before him a little more prominently. To remind him that voting to take from others to give to the poor does not make him any less a drain on society.

Must have missed it, one second you're supporting a 2yr shutdown of the government and then magically ranting about tort reform.

Oh well...

And it isn't "shutting down the govt for 2 years" although I'd love that. What bill can you imagine Obama signing that helps this country that Republicans would ever offer him?

100% ineffective do NOTHING government is a non government that is in effect shut down. I know you would like that, you're apparently an anarchist. But in the real world the US has obligations, I know that word makes you and other republicans cringe but tough fucking shit, and part of those obligations are to ME so I would appreciate not having the government destroyed, just b/c query n' vette don't feel like paying taxes.

Yes I can imagine him signing all kinds of shit. Not much I know of from the RW b/c they don't really come up with any ideas...they do quite literally NOTHING but bitch about how bad Obama is.

He got his way `100% the first 2 years

Liar...liar....pants on fuckin' fire.

and it accomplished more harm than good leading to the slowest recovery EVER. Not wanting more of that is progress.

As opposed to the republicans who damn near TOTALED this mother fucker last time we trusted them with the country??? OHhh OHhh you just forgot about that lil bit hua?

Slow and steady progress or in a total fucking nose dive? Hmmm I think (D) has (R)'s ass kicked on this one....

You never answered the questions before.....do you normally just not back up any of your wild claims?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

Looks like it will be business as usual in the House, even Pelosi is ecstatic.

I don't see why Pelosi or anybody would be happy at this point about business as usual. I mean you should, you love that your country is paralyzed from the neck up but unless he's turned over a new leaf and intends to work with the Dems it's kinda pointless no?

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

The country is paralyzed because you voted for a man without virtue, a man full of himself, with no desire to uphold, obey the law, or recognize election results that go against his party.

No. This is a democracy. When I voted for a man without virtue your virtue should have bowed and worked with me. When the four years were up and he won again you lost all excuses for not playing along. This country is paralyzed because your stomach turns so strongly at the idea of following a woman that you'd rather we fall behind. Don't blame the fact that I didn't respect how evil you are on that.

 

[KingOrfeo]

The country is paralyzed because you voted for a man without virtue, a man full of himself, with no desire to uphold, obey the law, or recognize election results that go against his party.

Well, yes, but he left office in 2009.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Boehner wins.

 

[Que]

No. This is a democracy. When I voted for a man without virtue your virtue should have bowed and worked with me. When the four years were up and he won again you lost all excuses for not playing along. This country is paralyzed because your stomach turns so strongly at the idea of following a woman that you'd rather we fall behind. Don't blame the fact that I didn't respect how evil you are on that.

If that were true there should have been a marked change of course in 2010 and again now that the policies have once again been refuted. And that didn't happen and is not happening. One guy who only has the power to sign or veto, doesn't get to rule over the majority of 535 other voices of the people.

 

[Que]

Okay now you're just getting into technicalities that don't matter one bit. As if in the process of robbing Peter to pay Paul the lawyer doesn't by a shiny car that does add to the GDP or that Paul didn't spend the money and that's if you honestly believe it's theft if you maim me with a known flaw to your device and not something I deserve because you fucked up.

Paying a lawyer to read the regs ensures they are followed. And regs have to be taken on a case by case basis if they in the end are a net good.

Popular myth but blatantly untrue.

That shiny new car just means that the ceo of the company he just extorted the money from buys one less shiny new car... same amount of shiny new cars.

 

[Kitty]

Vetteman just learned the word "congressional."

 

[Sean Renaud]

If that were true there should have been a marked change of course in 2010 and again now that the policies have once again been refuted. And that didn't happen and is not happening. One guy who only has the power to sign or veto, doesn't get to rule over the majority of 535 other voices of the people.

There was nothing to change course in 2010. Dems still had a majority and were still not getting their way. And now there will be a maikred change in policy even though in a rational world it would STILL be your obligation ultimately to negotiate since Obama's President. Yes he does get the right to rule over 535 other people, it's literally the description of his job. But he won't because he's a coward and we both know it.

That shiny new car just means that the ceo of the company he just extorted the money from buys one less shiny new car... same amount of shiny new cars.

No it doesn't. That guy will still buy a shiny new car. You can keep claiming that intelligence has no value but understand that's what your claiming. George Lucas produces no value at all to the wor

 

[Kitty]

There was nothing to change course in 2010. Dems still had a majority and were still not getting their way. And now there will be a maikred change in policy even though in a rational world it would STILL be your obligation ultimately to negotiate since Obama's President. Yes he does get the right to rule over 535 other people, it's literally the description of his job. But he won't because he's a coward and we both know it.

oh boy.

 

[Sean Renaud]

oh boy.

Sorry. All three of us. Didn't mean to leave you out.

 

[Kitty]

Sorry. All three of us. Didn't mean to leave you out.

No! Not me!! Lol

Ugh...it's so hard. Like...sigh. I respect and admire him but I am...not enthused. But I just can't say why in this kind of crowd. I don't want to look like I'm insulting him. Is that bad?

 

[BotanyBoy]

No! Not me!! Lol

Ugh...it's so hard. Like...sigh. I respect and admire him but I am...not enthused. But I just can't say why in this kind of crowd. I don't want to look like I'm insulting him. Is that bad?

No but it does make you look like either a partisan ass kiss or a racial ass kiss.

Kinda exactly like the folks who absolutely refuse to admit that Obama is anything but a Kenyan communist out to destroy the US are either partisan ass kissers or racist fucks.

The guy is fucking SPINELESS....or not much of a democrat and a total fucking liar/DINO. Take your pick but calling him weak and gutless is being nice.

What the fuck happened to bringing the troops home and we could take it to the bank? Oh wait liar....

HC reform? Sold us Romneycare.....a huge big pharma/insurance dick suck. Sure we got expanded coverage and blah blah.....still paying 5 star prime rib prices for Alpo Health Care, what a fucking joke.

Getting us energy independent? Re-upping and expanding PATRIOT act?

List goes on...he's Bush 2.0.

 

[Kitty]

No but it does make you look like either a partisan ass kiss or a racial ass kiss.

Kinda exactly like the folks who absolutely refuse to admit that Obama is anything but a Kenyan communist out to destroy the US are either partisan ass kissers or racist fucks.

The guy is fucking SPINELESS....or not much of a democrat and a total fucking liar/DINO. Take your pick but calling him weak and gutless is being nice.

I'm not partisan. Racial ass kiss maybe =\ But still is that bad?

It's not like I'm as bad about hugging Obama as vetteman is hating him.

I admit his faults when necessary. But I do not make so much noise as his haters because I do not want to be seen as the foolish colored gal insulting "her" President.

How's that?