Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

David Gold is surprised that freepers are supporting FDR/LBJ-scale Katrina spending
David Gold Show ^ | Sep 18 05 | David Gold

Posted on 09/19/2005 7:50:12 AM PDT by churchillbuff

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 241-247 next last
To: oceanview
let's not just jump in with some new grand plan

Perception is as important as reality here, and some puny little plan that looks stingy is not going to work.

The folks in the affected states need psychological reassurance as well, not green eye shades running around telling them they're out of luck because it's too expensive.

181 posted on 09/19/2005 9:58:41 AM PDT by sinkspur (It is time for those of us who have much to share with those who have nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: PISANO; davidtalker

David Gold is also FREEPER Davidtalker


182 posted on 09/19/2005 9:59:34 AM PDT by tertiary01 (It took 21 years but 1984 finally arrived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray
Sorry. I stick with my original statement - they are NOT entitled to Federal (taxpayer!) dollars to rebuild. They are entitled to their insurance and that's it.

Thankfully the rest of the country disagrees with you.

183 posted on 09/19/2005 9:59:53 AM PDT by sinkspur (It is time for those of us who have much to share with those who have nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Sally'sConcerns

"Which private business do you want to rebuild the port? The very one's that are going to be financially impacted because it's going to be closed for some time?

My suggestion is that rebuilding bonds are sold. I would love the opportunity to invest in the rebuilding of the port and to realize the potential profits from such a venture. In addition, I could see other specific targeted bond opportunities. This way, it would keep the money and investment private and it would offer scrutiny to the spending.


184 posted on 09/19/2005 10:00:07 AM PDT by CSM ( It's all Bush's fault! He should have known Mayor Gumbo was a retard! - Travis McGee (9/2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe; davidtalker

You can reply to him directly as davidtalker.


185 posted on 09/19/2005 10:01:54 AM PDT by tertiary01 (It took 21 years but 1984 finally arrived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

Half the country doesn't pay taxes or pays very little in taxes. Ain't it a pity that their vote counts just as much as mine?
It isn't hard to be in favor of spending someone else's money.


186 posted on 09/19/2005 10:04:16 AM PDT by Little Ray (I'm a reactionary, hirsute, gun-owning, knuckle dragging, Christian Neanderthal and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

The Stafford Act, passed in 2000, mandates that the federal government has to reconstruct 75% of an area after a disaster.


187 posted on 09/19/2005 10:07:47 AM PDT by sinkspur (It is time for those of us who have much to share with those who have nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray; ancient_geezer

"Half the country doesn't pay taxes or pays very little in taxes. Ain't it a pity that their vote counts just as much as mine?
It isn't hard to be in favor of spending someone else's money."

A solution has been proposed in the house and is discussed frequently on FR. Check out "ancient_geezer" and his ping list posts.


188 posted on 09/19/2005 10:10:16 AM PDT by CSM ( It's all Bush's fault! He should have known Mayor Gumbo was a retard! - Travis McGee (9/2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

Geez. Talk about an un-Constitutional law. How is 75% defined? Do they have to re-imburse the insurance companies?


189 posted on 09/19/2005 10:14:18 AM PDT by Little Ray (I'm a reactionary, hirsute, gun-owning, knuckle dragging, Christian Neanderthal and proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Clinton reduced spending because the Republican Congress made him do it.

Uh, no military spending increas would get his signature unless it was loaded to the hilt with goodies for Democrat constituncies

Not holding Clinton responsible for what went on under him is pure sophistry.

190 posted on 09/19/2005 10:16:55 AM PDT by Nonstatist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
The federal government is mandated to underwrite disaster relief and reconstruction. The only question is how it is going to be done. Should the feds attempt to use free market incentives and entrepreneurship as much as possible or should we just throw money at the problem? I think the POTUS has opted for the latter.

Two hundred billion is a humongous amount, but I have not seen owhat the time frame is for that kind of payout. Is that over one, three, five, year year? It kinda makes a difference.

191 posted on 09/19/2005 10:23:17 AM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: CSM
I asked upthread about bonds because my only knowledge about them other than in how they affect interest rates is nil.

I know you don't want to give me a complete financial lesson but I have questions about the feasibility of bonds based on some of what's already going on and what could happen.

There's already a thread posted about oil going up to 63.00+ a barrel. Some are saying it's speculation but we do already have 4 refineries offline. We also have Rita about to enter the Gulf. Several of the computerized maps are indicating she may hit Houston directly. Now if that happened, not only are we looking at another two ports being out of commission, we're looking at more refineries being shut down. That means heating oil, gasoline and other petroleum products going up. As the normal investor will have to pay more that will mean less capital capable of being invested. Is there enough discretionary income out there for investment into bonds if Rita should hit the Texas coast? (See my tagline if Rita really wants to come to Texas)
192 posted on 09/19/2005 10:24:18 AM PDT by Sally'sConcerns (Rita, if you have to visit Texas, the King Ranch area is nice this time of year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
You need to get over the idea of "small government".

You are blatently encouraging freepers to go against the mission statement of this web site.

193 posted on 09/19/2005 10:26:34 AM PDT by jmc813 ("Small-government conservative" is a redundancy, and "compassionate conservative" is an oxymoron.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: afnamvet
We believe in defending our borders, our constitution and our national sovereignty".

Yes, so do most of us.
Now if President Bush would just believe the same thing.

194 posted on 09/19/2005 10:30:28 AM PDT by carenot (Proud member of The Flying Skillet Brigade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Sally'sConcerns

"Is there enough discretionary income out there for investment into bonds if Rita should hit the Texas coast?"

I am no financial expert on bonds either. I envision them more as a loan from a private company that wants to build a certain assett. I would assume that enough discretionary income exists for those willing to take the risks. I would certainly move a portion of my 401K into a fund that invests in these opportunities. I imagine many others would do the same.

The biggest advantage that I'd see, is the ability of the private investors to directly hold the spenders accountable. In addition, the chances that the project would come in on time would be much higher with private investors and private builders.

Imagine the rebuilding of NO or the ports following the "Big Dig" management method.....


195 posted on 09/19/2005 10:33:32 AM PDT by CSM ( It's all Bush's fault! He should have known Mayor Gumbo was a retard! - Travis McGee (9/2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: carenot

I am beginning to question his belief system.


196 posted on 09/19/2005 10:36:26 AM PDT by afnamvet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: bert
When Americans are in danger and really hurting is no time for being stingy.

We have not been stingy.

Where does it say that the Fed Gov. can give our tax dollars away?

197 posted on 09/19/2005 10:45:21 AM PDT by carenot (Proud member of The Flying Skillet Brigade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: null and void

Neither am I and never was. I am a conservative that belongs to no party.


198 posted on 09/19/2005 10:48:38 AM PDT by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Another griper ? Get a grip. Are you sure you belong on a conservative website, or did you wander in here by accident ?

Spend your own money if you want - give privately. Do what these people have done: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1487391/posts

Please, back up your statement. Let us all know how 50 years of welfare and government dependency have helped these people, whereas a job at Walmart isn't a better solution until they get their own job training.

Your statement that private industry will not fund ports is absolutely ludicrous. Who do you think runs docks and ports across this country now ??????? Primarily private industry, altho there are a few ports, like Long Beach CA, where the docks and workers on the docks are controlled by the municipality. Still, private industry runs the businesses paying rent on the docks. Do you think that private industry will wait for the government to act ?

Hello - we don't "invest" in unproductive fellow Americans ? Hello, ever hear of welfare, food stamps, job training, unemployment insurance, etc etc ad nauseum ? No, we've invested so much in KEEPING these fellow Americans in poverty so they can vote politicians into office who will give them more and more welfare. You think we should spend more tax dollars on them ? Why should they carry insurance when they can count on taxpayers picking up the pieces ?

What all of these people need is for government to STAY OUT OF THE WAY - cut taxes, regulations, work rules etc etc - and let private individuals rebuild their lives and businesses as they see fit.

199 posted on 09/19/2005 10:49:32 AM PDT by cinives (On some planets what I do is considered normal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: cinives
What all of these people need is for government to STAY OUT OF THE WAY - cut taxes, regulations, work rules etc etc - and let private individuals rebuild their lives and businesses as they see fit.

AMEN!

200 posted on 09/19/2005 10:53:45 AM PDT by null and void (If you can read this, you are too close.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 241-247 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson