If somebody gave me free food, rent, and transportation I would not have to work. What is wrong with parents and students working to pay for their education like so many of us did and many still do. A student can work minimum wage full-time in the summer and make enough pay tuition and fees at many community colleges.
Americans Paid $90 Billion MORE In Taxes After Republican Tax Cut
- Thread starter Cinnabar
- Start date
If somebody gave me free food, rent, and transportation I would not have to work. What is wrong with parents and students working to pay for their education like so many of us did and many still do. A student can work minimum wage full-time in the summer and make enough pay tuition and fees at many community colleges.
reagansghost
eternal
meth rant ^^
But it's not the public doing that, per your own post.
You said it was the private taking advantage of the public because the public agencies lack enforcement with true teeth that can really stop the fraud that you are crying crocodile tears over.
So in your lazy BoTh SiDeS aRe ThE sAmE scenario, how is the government taking advantage of the government? What are you talking about?
I don't think it's OK, but what you've failed to show is how they would do that with a single payer despite already doing that with private insurance.
And BTW - all those things you mentioned above already take advantage of the system by way of the chargemaster.
We can't have an honest discussion about health care until you understand what a chargemaster is, and how it is used by providers and private insurers to set mutually beneficial costs.
WTF are you talking about? Why do you always have to speak in vague generalities? You're here, admitting that it's private companies defrauding the government. So the problem then, is that private companies defraud the government. So really, your argument is not an argument against government, but rather an argument against private companies who seem to always seek to take advantage of everyone. So thanks for making the case for government-run health care.
The Russia Tax Cut started on the calendar year, not the fiscal year, and what difference does it make when the tax cut started?
Also, the only place one can look for actual revenue numbers is here.
The distinction of when to start counting is nonsense and an attempt to make your argument work when it doesn't.
You've unilaterally changed the standard of counting surpluses to start on the fiscal year rather than the calendar year for no reason other than to post-hoc win an argument.
I never said I was willing to accept waste in the military. In fact, I've said several times that our military is not capable of waging 21st century warfare.
I don't know how I'm supposed to "check" the Pell Grant program; you're the one who said on the one hand it's wasteful, but then in literally the same post, said it was beneficial.
So this gets back to why I think you're lying because no professor would know who in their class gets a Pell Grant and who doesn't. That information is not something the registrar or bursar, or financial aid office would even give to a professor because that could result in bias. So ethically speaking, it's suspect that you can claim to know who in your classes got Pell Grants and who didn't. I don't know of any Financial Aid office that would share that info with professors. So I think you're making shit up.
When did I do that? Never.
So you're an idiot if you think that private insurers and providers don't already collude with one another to set mutually beneficial costs that adds to their bottom line. And you're also an idiot if you think that if you ceased with private insurers, the single payer would collude with providers to set mutually beneficial costs that adds to their bottom line when the single payer has no bottom line profit obligations to meet.
You've never once negotiated for anything in your life, and it shows.
So then you support more funding for Medicare fraud enforcement? Nope.
So what is the point of what you're saying?
You literally just said that private companies were the ones engaging in fraud:
How are the people committing fraud when it comes to Medicare? And when it comes to the Pell Grants example you gave, that is suspect too because it's all based on your anecdote. Then you very lazily say I should "talk to professors"...well I did that and you know what every professor I talked to said? That they don't know who in their classes get Pell Grants and who doesn't, and they couldn't know that information anyway because the University's financial aid office would never divulge that information to a professor because of the ethical issues that arise from that.
So that's why I know what you're saying is bullshit. You do that a lot; you substitute your own personal standard as the standard, or you just make shit up.
You just said that private companies defraud the government. The only instance you can conjure of people doing it is the anecdotal BS you are using as a substitute for fact. BS so apparent, it borders on the absurd.
OK, so then it sounds to me that so long as for-profit health care exists, there will always be fraud. So the natural progression should be to do away with for-profit health care, if you want to do away with the fraud. You said yourself it was private companies defrauding the government for health care; so then the simple solution is to do away with for-profit health care, which would do away with the fraud that comes from for-profit companies who are defrauding the government, as you said yourself.
So you are making the argument for government-run health care.
So Flash is doing to things here:
On the one hand, he thinks the government defrauds itself (how? I don't know).
Then on the other hand, he thinks private companies defraud the government (how? he doesn't say).
There are only two solutions to this problem;
1. Do away with for profit health care
2. Increase enforcement funding and operations
He wants to do neither; so really, he's just complaining about a problem and opposing all possible solutions because then he'd have nothing to complain about.
How long will it take you to understand that one cannot argue with a dishonest, low IQ idiot like LV426? Just saying.
Of course the wage increases are attributed mostly to the minimum wage increases, and you have yet to show any data that proves the contrary.
If you subtract the wage growth for the top 1% out of total wage growth, and subtract the wage growth at the bottom that was attributed to minimum wage increases, what was the actual wage growth for workers? Nominal over the last 40 years.
LOL. So, what you are saying is that revenues increase with tax cuts. We agree. Growth is a great indicator of greater revenue flow, the easiest way to set growth in motion when you are experiencing stagnation is with a tax cut. When the economy grows, so too does your revenue...
Actually, free public colleges cost $80B a year, which is less than the Russia Tax Cuts cost.
If there were ways to do it, we would have done so already. I guess the issue here is that you don't think education is a right, and I do.
So how do you make college free for people without Pell Grants or free public colleges?
They are fake anecdotes; anecdotes that are very questionable given what we do know about privacy at student financial offices in universities.
None of them would ever divulge to a professor which students in that professor's class get Pell Grants because it creates ethical issues.
How does it do that? Easy; take you, for example. You have an inherent bias against government, which means you are immediately suspicious of anyone who takes public money because in your mind, they are automatically assumed to be defrauding the government. So if you, as a professor, were to find out who in your class gets government aid, that will result in you treating that student differently than one who does not, doesn't it? You might grade them on a harsher curve; you might be more critical of how they approach the class...but none of that really happens because in no world would the university administrators ever share that info with you in the first place.
So we must stretch the bounds of credibility and accept your personal, biased, unethical assessment of Pell Grant recipients.
Why would that be the case when it's public colleges and universities? None of them are being operated for profit since they're all state schools.
Why would a public college or university be operated for profit?
Charter schools and for-profit private colleges are not public schools or state schools...so WTF are you talking about? Free public colleges means more for profit private colleges, how?
Everything you are talking about are for-profit private schools. We are talking about free public schools.
This is what you literally said:
So you do have contradicted yourself a lot this thread.
You're arguing that Pell Grants both prove and disprove your point, so maybe you need to sort yourself out.
But you were the one talking generally and ambiguously about spending, then when I try to nail down specifics you say "no, I didn't mean that".
Why not just say what you mean? Simple; you don't know what you mean.
What does free public colleges have to do with free food, rent and transportation?
Because the money that have to spend on education out of their own pocket has grown at a rate faster than their income has risen, and it has forced them to go into debt that then results in less consumer spending in the economy.
What is the benefit to the student, their family, or the economy to make them go into debt in order for them to get an education?
When we went to college, it was much cheaper than it is today. I graduated with my Master's in 2001 and carried only a total $5K debt load from student loans across both my undergrad and graduate schools. And that was going to Syracuse University and University of Chicago, which were both private schools.
Many community colleges are free or extremely low-cost. But you need more than just a community college these days if you want to join the workforce.
Revenue does not increase from tax cuts. Deficits increase. Revenue does not.
Revenue from 2018 was $60B less than revenue from 2017. The Russia Tax Cut started 1/2/18. So we can compare 12 months with a tax cut to 12 months without it.
Also, we were supposed to have at least 3% growth and we didn't.
We weren't stagnating when this shitty tax cut was passed.
Growth in 2018 was just 2.5%, which was below Obama's best growth in 2015 without a tax cut at 2.88%.
Tax cuts do not create economic growth. All they do is expand deficits.
Not true. The "money" I was talking about was government spending that serves no useful purpose for which I have given several examples. That does not include most Pell grants funds since they do benefit many students (although less than half graduate). However, the other spending and students receiving Pell grants that make no effort pass classes do provide zero return to society.
It's not that hard to understand. Spending that benefits students is very different than Pell Grant money which is wasted. And all the spending I was talking about was not just Pell Grants but included other types of spending.
No, I mentioned several specific government spending programs and proposed programs. From that you started talking about health care which I never mentioned (because it is a much bigger and more complicated issue). Then, when I said some of the spending programs provided zero return you said I was saying Pell Grants had zero return after I had already said they benefit many students.
I think Pell Grants and many other spending programs could be done more efficiently and cheaply by changing the way they operate. Too many government spending programs reward the agencies for spending more so there is little incentive to turn away students who have been making F's in every class for a year. There are requirements that students maintain certain averages, but there are always loopholes which allow them to enroll. Lower level employees approve those students because they know if the students go to their boss it will get approved by higher levels.
Your idea of free college could to some extend be accomplished by allowing eligible students to attend free when classes had empty spaces. At most non-selective schools many courses are canceled every semester because they don't get minimum enrollment and many other classes are small. Since these instructors have already been paid it costs the college nothing more to have students use those empty seats. Whether they also get money from the state for these students could be debated.
What makes you think any "free college" program would be limited to public schools? Federal loans and Pell Grants go to private and private for-profit colleges including technical and vocational schools. I don't know if it is still true, but at one time the largest group receiving federal loans and grants were attending for cosmetology.
Charter schools are operated with public money and are not private (although it probably varies by state). Charter schools are not applicable because they are not higher education institutions.
Again, I seriously doubt any program would leave out private colleges.
Only half true. My argument is against government programs that allow private, public, and nonprofit agencies to take advantage of them by wasting and defrauding money. When a government agency will get more funding because they have more clientele their agency benefits. They get more money because they supervise more people and their agency can afford to give raises--not "profits" but more money in salary and bonuses so it is very much in their interest.
For example, I gave one example of waste as the reconstruction projects in Iraq and Afghanistan. The IG had been on C-SPAN discussing this problem. When asked why would military personnel pay contractors who did not build the project, finish the job, or do decent work he said he asked those people the same question. The officers told him that they were evaluated based on how many contracts they issued with no regard to quality. That means that military person is getting bonuses, raises, and promotions without regard to the work done. That is fraud by the private contractor and unproductive conduct by the military. Too many government programs operate in this manner--so there is an incentive to spend money.
Last edited: