US spends 1.5 Million to study fat lesbians

Originally posted by normbenign
"Considering how much of a problem obesity in the US is, and how much it costs American tax payers through our health care system, I think a tiny grant that amounts to about 0.0000006% of 2012 tax revenue is worth it."

That seems like an excellent argument for losing the collectivist approach to health care. The other alternative is a total complex of laws that don't leave any choices for people to worry about.

That made absolutely no sense at all.

The argument for collectivist healthcare is the fact that ours is the only in the industrialized world that sucks and we're the only one who's NOT collectivist.

Originally posted by normbenign
The real question is should government be empowered to unlimited spending, and to unlimited borrowing?

No, of course not. Don't be silly.

Should they be forced to make choices based on priorities?

You're being silly. Of course they have to make choices.

I haven't got anything personal against this particular expense.

I support this particular expense.

People have to make choices based on priorities.

Originally posted by FMF
No, of course not. Don't be silly.

[b]Should they be forced to make choices based on priorities?

You're being silly. Of course they have to make choices.

I haven't got anything personal against this particular expense.

I support this particular expense.

People have to make choices based on priorities.[/b]

You support the expense, but you don't pay taxes in the US. Vote as you will to spend and borrow willy nilly back in the Islands, but you don't have a vote here.

Originally posted by normbenign
You support the expense, but you don't pay taxes in the US. Vote as you will to spend and borrow willy nilly back in the Islands, but you don't have a vote here.

If I were in the U.S. I would [ a ] support the research, and [ b ] not complain about the taxes I pay being spent on it, and [ c ] vote in elections.

Originally posted by FMF
If I were in the U.S. I would [ a ] support the research, and [ b ] not complain about the taxes I pay being spent on it, and [ c ] vote in elections.

If bullfrogs had wings. I suspect there are plenty of Americans who believe and vote as you would, otherwise Obama would not have been reelected while running up more debt than spendthrift Bush in a full eight years.

With borrowing what it has become, I believe we must object to not only spending we absolutely oppose, but also a lot that may just be not very useful, or of lower priority.

Plus, I'm almost certain you would find some government spending to complain about between elections.

Originally posted by normbenign
If bullfrogs had wings.

Which of the three things I said do you not believe?

Originally posted by normbenign
With borrowing what it has become, I believe we must object to not only spending we absolutely oppose, but also a lot that may just be not very useful, or of lower priority.

I think spending on research into obesity is "useful" and not "lower priority".

Originally posted by FMF
Which of the three things I said do you not believe?

I believe you would complain, as it is your right to do here.

Originally posted by FMF
I think spending on research into obesity is "useful" and not "lower priority".

You of course are entitled to your opinion, but the US is broke.

Originally posted by normbenign
I believe you would complain, as it is your right to do here.

He said he would not complain about that particular research, not that he wouldn't complain about any spending.

Also, glad to see you reversed yourself from claiming he's for unlimited spending.

Originally posted by normbenign
You of course are entitled to your opinion, but the US is broke.

Literally every country in the world runs on deficits and has for many, many decades.

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
He said he would not complain about that particular research, not that he wouldn't complain about any spending.

Also, glad to see you reversed yourself from claiming he's for unlimited spending.

Of course he's for unlimited spending on approved stuff.

Originally posted by normbenign
You of course are entitled to your opinion, but the US is broke.

People have to make choices based on priorities because funds are not infinite.

Originally posted by normbenign
Of course he's for unlimited spending on approved stuff.

Where have I said anything remotely like this? $1.5 million on obesity research is not "unlimited spending". You're just making stuff up.

Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
Literally every country in the world runs on deficits and has for many, many decades.

That reminds me of the argument my kids used ineffectively on me, all the other kids are doing it.

Do you believe there are no consequences of deficit spending, or monetary abuses?

I'm reading a book by Henry Haslett written 1969. It is instructive to see the money values of those days gone by. There are consequences and risks attached to continual deficit spending.