[Info-vax] HP stopping VMS paper documentation ?

[AEF]

On Dec 4, 11:45 pm, c... at wvnet.edu (George Cook) wrote:
> In article <4edc08c5$0$2173$c3e8da3$9f400... at news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spam... at vaxination.ca> writes:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > George Cook wrote:
> >> Arguing against leftist dogma is futile, so I will respond no more after
> >> this.  Kool-Aid has no antidote.
>
> > This isn't a question of finding an antidote. It is a question of
> > finding the right balance. This isn't black or white, it is a grey area.
>
> >> No.  Government taxing and borrowing directly reduces prosperity, while
> >> government spending creates very little prosperity.
>
> > The lesson learned from the 1929 crash is quite simple: government MUST
> > play a role to soften the impact of recessions to prevent depressions.
> > This is accomplished through social spending to ensure the poor still
> > spend some money during such times to support the economy.
>
> > That is why even the USA has some social securty safety net.
>
> > How this spending should be done during recessions is the big question.
> > And it should not be designed to be a permanently important part of an
> > economy.
>
> >> major drag on the creation of prosperity is the main reason that
> >> government should be no bigger than needed to provide for security and
> >> basic infrastructure.
>
> > The problem is that historically, the parties that call for small
> > government end up being the biggest spenders and the biggest growers of
> > debts. And this is not in the USA only. We have this in Canada too.
>
> > One of the major problems happens when a party spends your tax dollars
> > helping large corporations be more profitable instead of helping the
> > people who are poor.  This is especially true when large corporations
> > now tend to create more jobs abroad which means your tax dollars are
> > helping create jobs in China and India.
>
> >> War (Irag or otherwise) has no relation to wasteful and economically
> >> destructive domestic spending.
>
> > Excuse me ?  Spending your tax dollars abroad to kill and destroy
> > doesn't help the funareal industry in the USA, doesn't help the
> > construction industry in the USA and doesn't build any infrastructure in
> > the USA.
>
> > war is wasteful spending no matter way you look at it. I may be
> > necessary when you are attacked, but when you unilaterally decide to
> > attack a country because you don't like the colour of the tie its leader
> > is wearing, there is absolutely no economical benefit to the attacking
> > country, except to the makers of bombs and ammunition.
>
> You completely missed the point.  Just because we spend (wasteful or
> not) on war is not an excuse (or reason) to wastefully and/or
> destructively spend domestically.  It's a Red Herring that the left
> always brings out when they are losing the argument on wasteful
> domestic spending.  Once the Red Herrings come out, any further
> discussion is futile, which is why I've stopped responding to AEF.
>
> George Cook

You completely missed a lot of my points. On this one:

Wasteful and destructive spending of any sort are not justified. Fine.
But you appear to forgiving your hero Geroge W. Bush for any of this
(the Iraq war in particular). That's my point. Spending that helps the
poor is somehow evil while killing thousands of Americans and Iraqis,
and severely injuring tens of thousands American soldiers, including
serious brain injuries, for a war that never should have been waged,
is somehow okay by you. Aside from comparing it to "domestic
spending", all you've said of it is that it created more than a few
jobs. Aside from all the killing and severe injuries, it's hardly an
economical way to create jobs! How much did each of these jobs cost to
create? I bet a crap-load.

What particular wasteful spending do you refer to? Corporate welfare?
Ethanol subsidies? Tax breaks for big oil companies, who would clearly
do fine on their own? NO! Instead it's negative income tax, too much
tax on the well-to-do and not enough on those already suffering at the
bottom. Yes, there's still other wasteful spending, but you're letting
Mr. Bush off the hook for the Iraq war, the mother load of recent
gov't spending.

AEF