Governor Perry-What a liar

[j_war06 0]

Just because someone does not believe that the government should be the first responder to a personal financial situation, does not mean a person does not have pity for the unfortunate.

Families should be looking out for family members in the situation above. Second choice - faith-based or other community-based organizations.

The VERY LAST CHOICE should be government; having the government "equalize" living conditions is a socialist/communist situation and not in the American tradition. There are countries who have done this, or tried this.

The Texas governor's race is really not going to affect this one way or the other, however.

I have earlier made reference to the Democrat governor Mark White, who was elected by rallying Texas teachers (of which I was one) to his cause, and who then betrayed all of us by forcing the TECAT test down our throats(supposedly to justify a salary increase). This must be bringing up bad memories that refute the arguments presented here about how Republicans do not support public education. The sad fact is that no political party actually supports public education; they do, however, want the teacher organizations' support. There are some candidates who do want to see public education survive, and if it continues the way it is, it will not.

The best thing you can do for Texas public education is to inform yourself about the candidates' past actions, their current views, and match them to your point of view, then vote your conscience. After that, get involved in your area's school district/school board/school and make sure they are spending money on programs that really benefit the majority of students. Make sure the money isn't concentrated in the ad. buildings. It will help if you have an accounting background, because they are very tricky about hiding it in very complex budgets. I'm not sure that even school board members really understand where all the money is going.

I applaud everyone for their passion and interest in the political process.

Thank you very much, this is really how I feel too, but they wont understand this

[Carlene 12]

They should move to a cheaper city, like the one I live in. Why didnt she finish highschool? Its free...Why didnt she go to college? Doesnt she have parents or other family? Why is she single?

Didn't you read the whole post? She graduated high school and finished 2 years of college. And she's single because her husband left her. Or he beat the crap out of her and she had the good sense to leave him. What difference does it make?

Most parents cannot afford to pick up the slack. I know I can't. I had a grandchild born with a serious birth defect. After a month in NICU, his hospital bill was over $100 K. Who's parents can afford that kind of "help"?

As for moving to a "cheaper city", the wages are lower there, too. My DIL lives in a small town and works for the city. She has 3 years of college, and earns $10.00 per hour. Similar positions in larger communities pay more, but the cost of living is higher, too.

[j_war06 0]

Where is the child support. Cities pay more than towns, do you think I wanted to move 7hours away from my hometown and all the family Ive ever known? NO, but I had to. Why didnt she have more college? 2 years is nothing these days.

[Carlene 12]

Just because someone does not believe that the government should be the first responder to a personal financial situation, does not mean a person does not have pity for the unfortunate.

Families should be looking out for family members in the situation above. Second choice - faith-based or other community-based organizations.

The VERY LAST CHOICE should be government; having the government "equalize" living conditions is a socialist/communist situation and not in the American tradition. There are countries who have done this, or tried this.

The Texas governor's race is really not going to affect this one way or the other, however.

As I said in my response to Jodie, families can only do so much. They can provide an occasional safety net for things like car repairs, food, a little cash, etc but most of us can't do it month after month, nor can we step up to the plate and write a check to the hospital for thousands of $$$ in order to have a grandchild's tonsils removed, broken leg set, etc.

Faith-based organizations (one of which I supervised for 15 years) provide mostly emergency assistance. They don't pay 2 or 3 electric bills in a row, or $100 toward the rent every month, and they don't have the budget to cover huge expenses - like a $1,000 dental bill.

State governments "equalize" living conditions all the time. In NY, there is rent control. In most all states there is regulation of utility and other expenses. Airfares used to be regulated. College tuition in Texas was just deregulated in 2003 (a bill pushed thru by Rick Perry, to the sorrow of all college students since). And all 50 states have some kind of health insurance (Medicaid) program. In Texas, ours just happens to suck.

In the end it becomes the taxpayer's burden anyway. When people don't have access to regular, affordable health care, they go to the nearest ER - even for non-emergency issues. Only private, for-profit hospitals are allowed to turn away acutely ill people. The rest get treated and the cost is passed on to the rest of us. HMO's funded by the state, according to a sliding scale, are a much more cost-effective plan.

By the way....Rick Perry STOLE the funds from the state's energy aid program and used them to pad his much-touted "budget surplus". So no, I don't think he has "pity for the unfortunate". And the governor's race could have changed a lot....but it won't, because the Democrats and Independents have managed to make sure he gets re-elected.

[mousecrazy 2]

Carlene, what I am trying to get across is an invitation to examine the idea that we should want to entrust the government (any level) with the task of solving these personal problems. Choosing a governor, while admittedly important, will not change things all that much. Hatred for a particular man/woman is misplaced. It might be better to look for policy/process flaws. As I have now mentioned three times, a Democrat governor seriously let down the Texas teachers in the past.

I simply do not subscribe to the view that government should be responsible for individual financial and life decision problems. I do not like rent control, either. I do not like imminent domain. There are many similar issues where I would propose that government is not the best solution.

Health care...I would absolutely not want to be part of state-funded health care program. I do not want to die while waiting for my name to come up to the top of a list for a diagnostic test or treatment, and that is exactly what happens in, say, Canada.

Example: here at my school, we have a large population of free and reduced lunch recipients...the same kids who are getting free lunch are wearing $140 sneakers. THAT is poor decision-making, not true need. They are driving cars with $300 dollar rims per wheel, but choosing not to pay for insurance for their baby.

Is everyone like this? I agree with you, no. Are many, I hope you will be able to agree with me, yes. That is why it is better to educate people in making good choices. Provide the opportunites, encourage people to take advantage of them, and understand that people will not always act in their own best interest.

I don't know whether Rick Perry has pity for the unfortunate or not; I was referring to Jodi in that comment. She may or she may not. That does not imply that government should step in and correct poor decision-making.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

one more thing for now...

"...I say that every prince must desire to be considered merciful and not cruel. He must, however, take care not to misuse this mercifulness. Cesere Borgia was considered cruel, but his cruelty had brought order to Romagna, united it, and reduced it to peace and fealty.

Much like Saddam Hussein united Iraq?.

[Carlene 12]

Where is the child support. Cities pay more than towns, do you think I wanted to move 7hours away from my hometown and all the family Ive ever known? NO, but I had to. Why didnt she have more college? 2 years is nothing these days.

Jodie....are you missing the point on purpose? It doesn't matter WHY she doesn't get child support or have more than 2 years of college. This isn't a real person....it's just an example!

And yes, cities pay more than towns. It also costs more to live in cities than in towns.

[j_war06 0]

Where I live I can get a whole 2 bedroom 2 bath town house for about $800 a month in a nice neighborhood. Yes it does matter, it is always a good idea to analyze hypothetical situations, otherwise there is no point in making them if you do not ask questions about them. What is the point if your are not going to raise questions?

Also, Machiavelli's point is that you neither make friends nor enemies as a politician, but rather carress or annihiliate whoever the need maybe to do so. It is political thought, it is an amazing thing. You have to look at it in theory and apply it to today's issues in order to understand the art of philisophical thinking, and not take its literal meaning. You must use your enlightenment to understand the issue and think in depth rather than what comes to the top of your brain, but thank you for actually reading the piece.

Also, Iraq was fine, they were no threat to us in reality, now North Korea they are a threat, but Bush had to finish his daddy's business and jumped on them, although there was no actual reasonable cause. Why is the US concerned with other countries' business? Anyways this is off topic, sorry

[Carlene 12]

Carlene, what I am trying to get across is an invitation to examine the idea that we should want to entrust the government (any level) with the task of solving these personal problems. Choosing a governor, while admittedly important, will not change things all that much. Hatred for a particular man/woman is misplaced. It might be better to look for policy/process flaws. As I have now mentioned three times, a Democrat governor seriously let down the Texas teachers in the past.

I simply do not subscribe to the view that government should be responsible for individual financial and life decision problems. I do not like rent control, either. I do not like imminent domain. There are many similar issues where I would propose that government is not the best solution.

Health care...I would absolutely not want to be part of state-funded health care program. I do not want to die while waiting for my name to come up to the top of a list for a diagnostic test or treatment, and that is exactly what happens in, say, Canada.

Example: here at my school, we have a large population of free and reduced lunch recipients...the same kids who are getting free lunch are wearing $140 sneakers. THAT is poor decision-making, not true need. They are driving cars with $300 dollar rims per wheel, but choosing not to pay for insurance for their baby.

Is everyone like this? I agree with you, no. Are many, I hope you will be able to agree with me, yes. That is why it is better to educate people in making good choices. Provide the opportunites, encourage people to take advantage of them, and understand that people will not always act in their own best interest.

I don't know whether Rick Perry has pity for the unfortunate or not; I was referring to Jodi in that comment. She may or she may not. That does not imply that government should step in and correct poor decision-making.

And if the government, an entity that feels entitled to regulate every other aspect of life for its citizens, should not be responsible for its most defenseless members (children and elderly), then whose job is it? Let's punish that baby because its dad spends his money on expensive rims instead of providing health care for his child. That makes perfect sense.

I was not advocating publicly funded health care for the general population - just for those who have no other source of health care.

How does the state "educate people in making good choices" when there ARE no choices? In the example I gave Jodie, what choices did you have for that young woman? Borrow from her parents...beg for help from churches. Is that the best the state can come up with? If being poor is wrong, maybe everyone who doesn't pull his/her own weight financially should just be executed.

I'm sorry, but I will never be able to harden my heart to those less fortunate. I was raised by a single mom who very rarely saw any support from my alcoholic father. Yes, my mother had lots of help from her family and I don't know what would have become of us if she hadn't. And she had a college education, but it was still tough. My mother made most of my clothes and took in ironing to pay for my dancing lessons. I guess if I were growing up today and got a free lunch at school, someone would say, "She doesn't need that free lunch; her mother can afford to send her to dance class." What arrogance!

I don't really like entitlement programs either. I worked with those people every day for 15 years and I know that too much of it saps ambition. But for such basic human needs programs as WIC and free school lunches, I just think it's small and mean-spirited to begrudge those things. It's food, for heaven's sake. And if memory serves from my own days in public school, not very good food, at that.

[BJean 16]

I feel all warm and fuzzy right now about being a Democrat. This has been good for me to read what other people think who endorse a man like Rick Perry. From time to time I get a little outraged by Republican retoric and commentators and I can't understand how people can be so hard-hearted and self-serving. Reading this thread makes it quite clear.

[terrriho 0]

Hey BJean, do I detect a note of sarcasm in your last post? Pleas tell me it isn't so.

Terri

[BJean 16]

Terri: I don't believe I was being sarcastic at all. Have you read all of this thread? I was making an observation about my own politics after reading about others' here.

Do you have any problem with Rick Perry or Geo. W. and their decisions for the people they govern; less specifically, with the Republican agenda?

[JasminesMystic 0]

Jodie...

And exactly WHY would we vote for a man who hasn't "come through on his promises"? Maybe because RICK PERRY IS A LIAR?

I am totally underwhelmed with the opposition but I am not voting FOR Bell, Strayhorn, or Friedman...I voted AGAINST Rick Perry.

Rick Perry does not value children, education, teachers, or the working class. Want to know why we have so much money in the state coffers now, with more pouring in all the time? Because Rick Perry cut Medicaid to millions of poor Texas children and elderly. He skimmed money off dedicated programs (special license plate sales, lottery, utility assistance,etc) and added it to the general fund. Now he wants to do away with the business tax, which hasn't even gone into effect yet.

During Rick Perry's watch, our electric bills have more than DOUBLED. And Perry wants us to believe that total deregulation of utilities will fix that? HA!

Rick Perry is the best friend big business ever had....well, since George Bush, anyway.

Are you sure you can afford to support Rick Perry?

Carlene,

Amen....couldn't have said it any better, I wonder how the man looks in the mirror at night

[green 6]

As a Canadian I feel I should say a few words about our health system. (Mousecrazy, for one, doesn't seem to understand it.) Canada's universal health care system works just fine if you happen to live in or near a heavily populated metropolitan centre. It is those people who live in thinly populated rural areas who are under-served. Medical centres housing expensive high tech machines and specialists are far away from these individuals. This makes sense on a dollar and cents level and your business driven style of medical care would certainly not alter this situation for this is one of demographics.

You may be interested to learn that those countries - all of industrialised Europe and Canada as well as Australia and New Zealand - who practise socialised medicine spend significantly less per capita on health costs that the United States does. Our costs per capita clock in at about $2000 less than yours. This is because we have removed big business from the equation.

Moreover, my brother, who now practises medicine in the States, says that he finds his treatment of his patients constrained by his patients' financial situations. He might not be able to order all the tests and procedures that he would like. This was never a concern when he practised medicine back in Canada.

For those of you who believe that the American way is better, have you never considered that you have been on the receiving end of a lot of spin? You have big business and big business friendly politcians who have an agenda that they wish to push who are feeding this disinformation to you. These are people who have a lot to lose.

[Tired_Old_Man 1]

It is easy to quote stories about people getting reduced rate lunches or help from the government and driving Cadillacs or having expensive wheels on their cars, but did anyone stop to think why.

Is it possible that the really rich and powerful like to pit the middle-class against the poor, so that they can get away with (just short of) murder?

President Richard Nixon used to make a point of talking about the nobility of work. But then he pushed bills through congress that lowered the tax on every kind of earnings except those gotten from work.

If a man worked two jobs back then at $6 an hour and made $25,000 in a year, his tax burden would be twice that of a man who had bought a house for $100,000 and sold it for $125,000 making $25,000 profit. Why? Because Nixon pushed through a “capital gains” tax that cut your capital gains (on profits) tax in half.

Who worked harder? The man who worked 80 hours per week or the one who bought a house, held it for a few years and then sold it? They did the same thing with profit on stocks. Working people were penalized for "working".

People tell me that the CEO of this company or that deserves to make big money because he works hard. When Nixon put a price and wage freeze into effect for a few years in the late 60's/early 70's, the CEO and President of the company that I worked for were allowed to get raises for 3 consecutive years each, which were larger (each year) than my (frozen) gross per year. And they never got their hands dirty or broke a sweat. And the company lost millions of dollars each year. So why were they getting raises?

Why does a worker making $25 per hour sound over-paid? But an executive making $100,000 a year sound ok? If they made $100,000 per year, I would not bitch, but some are making $100,000,000 a year. The man who just retired as the CEO of Exxon-Mobil gets such a large retirement that if someone offered him the next 104 winning Florida Lottery tickets in return for his retirement money, he would be insulted.

To regular people, hitting the lottery is a life altering event, but to the people that own this country, it is less than a week's pay. Bill Gates has averaged over a $2,500,000 a day since the minute he was born. How many people on this forum are near retirement and have not earned $1,000,000 in their entire life? How many people on this forum are near retirement and have not earned $2,000,000 in their entire life? That is less than Bill Gates' daily income.

How can one man work that hard? Obviously he can't. It takes the government passing laws to protect him and then protecting him. Bill Gates has a program written for him and then his company sells that program and if anybody copies that program, the government prosecutes them for copyright infringement.

Does the government protect you that way?

People make transactions and then get paid over and over for it. I used to be an aircraft mechanic. If I changed the auto-pilot on a 747, I got paid $25 for the hour it took me to change it. I didn't get paid each time the pilot used his auto-pilot on every subsequent flight.

So the government protects some people's income more than others. OK, I can live with that. The government probably taxes them for that extra protection. Not anymore. The maximum tax rate has been dropping and dropping. In the 1950's, when the USA experienced unprecedented economic growth, the highest tax bracket was 90%. Now it is 1/3 of that. An aircraft mechanic and his wife (who is a nurse) pay the same percentage of their income in taxes as Bill Gates or Oprah.

Some people are still pissed off about the welfare cheats. Well, maybe the reason for welfare cheats is that the government dropped the number of case workers who used to check for cheating. That way the middle-class can fight the poor, while the rich get richer. The wealthiest one half of one percent of the people in this country own more that the lowest 95% of the country combined. Think about that next time you see someone getting over on food stamps.