TheCommander's comment history

TheCommander said...

aae, you are so correct and that is the exactly what we discovered: the offering of our tax money to developers and corporations is universally opposed regardless of political ideology. I have research from the John Birch society all the way to the NEA that all perfectly agree on the negative effects of tools like TIF and PILOT. One of the very best single resources I have on TIF and redevelopment for people to read to come up to speed is a PDF from a former California State rep. Chris Norby called "Redevelopment; The Unknown Government". I point everyone to that publication. I hope we can all meet someday very soon around this most important issue. It is exciting to see people come alive about this in Chattanooga. Until Helen B.S. came along, most people never knew there was something like an IDB. If they really understood its origin, organization and purpose, they would be horrified.

August 11, 2014 at 8:33 p.m.
TheCommander said...

Good work aae on keeping us informed. I am glad you are going to these meetings of the IDB. Just a few years ago no one ever knew there was anything called an industrial development board. How can we continue to support one another in getting the word out? Is there a website we can post locally? Are you organizing in-person meetings?

August 11, 2014 at 6:28 p.m.
TheCommander said...

Ike said - "So, aae: the Jews in my family aren't citizens? Are they allowed to run for office?"

In this oppressive Christian Theocracy we have here in America, the Jews have it very rough, don't they Ike? Let me ask you: What nation(s) is it better for the Jew than in America today? Atheist Russia? Moslem Iran? How about the Ukraine? Would you counsel them to all go back to Europe?

Let's face it: On America's worst day, it is better for a Jew, Black, Hispanic, White, oriental, etc... here than ANY other nation on earth period. Do you deny that?

May 12, 2014 at 8:27 p.m.
TheCommander said...

"At the end of the day, money talks, and the company will likely build the car at the location that offers the best combination of government sweeteners and trade advantages."

Wacker, Amazon, Whirlpool, Hemlock, Electrolux, VW, etc... all in PILOT programs, all not paying into our tax base while consuming massive services. Hamilton County added $42 million in debt "year over year". How is that for the economic impact of VW on our area Mr. Kennedy?

"And don't be overly concerned by recent reports of slumping year-over-year Passat sales. Family sedan sales are notoriously cyclical and usually peak near the middle of a five-year product cycle. A promised freshening of the Passat's design next year should help boost sales until a more substantial redesign arrives in a couple of years."

Isn't the "middle of a five-year product cycle" 2 1/2 years? We have now been selling the Passat for 2 years of that supposed cycle and sales are already tanking and you are telling us not to be "overly concerned" about OUR investment that our government should have never made?

RT, good job. Keep reminding people of what happened in Pennsylvania.

May 4, 2014 at 1:56 p.m.
TheCommander said...

Is it not amazing that the same people who claim that we cannot control our sexual desires at the same time claim that man has the power and responsibility to control the climate?

March 31, 2014 at 9:05 p.m.
TheCommander said...

Sharon Guy said (and not the Bible) - "God is in charge of deciding human destiny. Who do you think you are to meddle in the destiny of others?"

The idea of a personal destiny is fatalism which is a philosophy that comes from paganism and is no where taught in the Bible. God has put your future in your hands and in your hands alone. Maybe you don't like the freedom that God gave to man to make his own choices but it cannot be denied. What the liberal critic really doesn't like is the responsibility and consequences that come from man's choices. When one makes a claim of destiny, it is very easy to push all blame onto God Himself, is it not?

March 31, 2014 at 7:35 p.m.
TheCommander said...

Plato, I am not calling you a liar. However, you just repeated the greatest liberal lie in the entire healthcare debate in your statement:

"not funding Medicaid and sending people to the ERs"

I believe your numbers on Erlanger's losses but you believe that the uninsured flood the emergency rooms and then don't pay. That is factually incorrect. Medicaid drives people to the emergency room !!!

Don't believe me. Don't believe Ayn Rand. Don't believe Tea Party Patriots. How about a study by Harvard in the state of Oregon:

90,000 people. 30,000 were given medicaid by lottery. The results: the 30,000 with medicaid went to the ER 40% more than the other 60,000!!!

Medicaid expansion will drive even more to Erlanger, the price caps force the hospital to operate at a loss on each and every patient. Erlanger's financial results will get even worse the more you expand medicaid. Again, go back to my rent control example in NYC if you want to see the future.

Here is the link to the study:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/343/6168/263.abstract

BTW, how can you make the claim with certainty that the uninsured don't pay anything? Any documentation? If you have info, I would like to see it.

March 12, 2014 at 7:31 p.m.
TheCommander said...

I know nothing of Ayn Rand. My problem is this once again: "it's a huge benefit to the states". You cannot have a benefit without cost. Whether the benefit comes directly from Washington to us or it comes through two layers (federal and then state) the ultimate costs rest on us directly in taxation. Liberals do not understand this one principle: government spending IS taxation. When they spend, you are taxed. If you are not taxed enough directly, then borrowing and printing makes up the difference which drives inflation which acts as a tax as well.

You are right about one thing for sure: I am a total fool by your definition. I e-mail my local politicians often about them running our state, counties and cities using so-called federal dollars. Haslam has mastered the art of coming to town with a new state or federal grant in his hand for the local mayor to show off. The results are huge increases in debt and massive growth in local government almost universally which we will leave to our kids.

I am a fool because I absolutely and consistently say "turn it down"!! If you really care about those who need healthcare, offer to pay someones bill at a walk-in clinic. it might sooth your conscience. The more we legislate rights, it is those very things that start as universal rights that become the object of allocation programs due to scarcity of resources. Did Ayn Rand say all that?

March 11, 2014 at 10:23 p.m.
TheCommander said...

Answer me this question:

Is "Taxpayers send(ing) their money to Washington" and then demanding they have a "right to receive benefit for it" the "smart" or the "stupid" way to do it?

Show me ANY ONE area that the government delivers a product or service more cost effectively and with more universal access than the private market? To illustrate let's apply your principles in another area that is even more critical than healthcare: let's scrap our current food distribution system in America, send a standard amount of food money to Washington every year and then declare food a universal right in legislation.

How will that workout? You can scream Tea Party !! Tea Party !! all you want but government involvement in any and all areas leads to a loss of personal freedom and scarcity of the very thing it declares to you to be a right. If it worked, I would be for it. We just have too much human history that clearly tells us that government needs to be limited to its basic functions and run just those basics as poorly as we all expect they would.

March 11, 2014 at 9:14 p.m.
TheCommander said...

Obamacare will operate much like the history of NYC rent control:

I remember driving through the Bronx everyday as a kid on the Cross Bronx Expressway wondering why all the buildings were burned down? Years later I learned the answer from Milton Friedman:

Rent caps on apartments made it impossible to own, operate and maintain apartment buildings there. The owners had buildings in which they could not turn a profit so it was better to burn them to the ground.

Liberals do not and I believe cannot understand that there is a difference between price and cost but I'll try one more time:

Legislating price caps will make the crowds cheer because their prices will seemingly go down or at least be frozen, but the true cost does not evaporate; it remains. This only results in scarcity. It results in reduced supply; reduced services offered. ECON 101

March 10, 2014 at 9:49 p.m.
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.