# Stupid liberal idea of the day **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 20, 2011, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086 "2011-04-20T15:35:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 123
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2014, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2441 "2014-09-03T01:52:28Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > _Of course_ it can be. Can you really not see that? How about an example: the Interstate Highway system. It CAN be, which is why I said it was misleading rather than an outright lie. First, an investment is something that is likely to have a positive return. A lot of government spending that is supposed to provide a return to taxpayers, either directly or indirectly, doesn’t live up to expectations. A good example is education, where higher “investments” have produced the exact same results as the lower level of spending did. Most spending is pure consumption. Spending on things like Social Security or food stamps is only an investment if you think that you are “investing” when you go to the grocery store or pay your electric bill. There are legitimate reasons to favor such spending, but that spending is consumption, not investment. or in other words, just “spending”. But the public doesn’t like spending, so Democrats mislead by describing everything now as an investment. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2014, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2442 "2014-09-03T22:12:17Z")
> [@VarlosZ](#): > > “Damn, it’s hot out today.” > “Here, come sit under this beach umbrella, you’ll be cooler that way.” > “No, warming and cooling is caused by the sun, not beach umbrellas. There’d be no point.” Thank you for arguing my point for me. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2014, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2443 "2014-09-03T22:15:29Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Thank you for arguing my point for me. Clothy, do you at least appreciate that the vast majority of working scientists in the field think global warming is real? What I just said is a fact. It really is. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2014, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2444 "2014-09-03T22:15:46Z")
> [@](#): > > Thank you for arguing my point for me. Somebody has to. You sure as hell can’t. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2014, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2445 "2014-09-03T22:29:01Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > And he calls liberals predictable. Here’s my next prediction for him: a plethora of “LOLs” and accusations of whining, in the most irritating, whiny posting style possible. Who wants action? [QUOTE=Clothahump] Many of them. But of course, they were whined about and ignored by the libs on the board. [/QUOTE] Ding ding ding! That’s a winner ladies and gentlemen! Everyone who laid bets, please pay **Jack Batty**. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2014, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2446 "2014-09-03T22:49:01Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > Thank you for arguing my point for me. I wish this guy were a poe. That way I wouldn’t have to accept the concept of someone that stupid making it to breeding age. ---
**Author:** ![Finagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b19c9b/32.png) [@Finagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Finagle)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2447 "2014-09-10T00:38:49Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > \*\*A humanitarian organization battling Ebola in Africa pleaded for help for more than a month before the well-publicized infections of two Americans finally prompted a response from the U.S. government, an administrator with Samaritan’s Purse told a congressional subcommittee on Thursday. > > “In mid-June, I began speaking privately to U.S. officials that the disease was spiraling out of control and more needed to be done immediately,” said Ken Isaacs, vice president of the North Carolina-based Christian missionary organization. “That the world would allow two relief agencies to shoulder this burden along with the overwhelmed Ministries of Health in these countries testifies to the lack of serious attention the epidemic was given.”\*\* > If there’s a pattern in this administration other than incompetence, it’s that no decisions ever get made quickly. No matter how urgent the situation. So Adaher, I’m interested in your opinion on the following: [GOP-cuts-obamas-ebola-funding-request](http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/217115-gop-cuts-obamas-ebola-funding-request). Specifically, I’m interested in finding out how you’re going to spin this so that it’s Obama’s fault. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2448 "2014-09-10T00:45:27Z")
It’s not Obama’s fault, and it’s not necessarily a bad thing. None of us know the “correct” amount to spend on ebola. Unfortunately, it’s natural for people to just listen to the first number they hear and consider that the right amount of funding, and if less than that gets passed, it’s a “cut”. Neither of us know if $40 million gets us better results than $80 million. If that was a sure thing, we’d just spend 10 times that and beat ebola even quicker. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2449 "2014-09-10T00:55:19Z")
I wasn’t there when that number was picked out of a hat. What’s the procedure on that, how many numbers in the hat? Obama asked experts in the field for an educated guess, and that’s gonna have to be the best we got, because nobody knows how this is going to play out. How much water will it take to put out the fire? Being wrong either way isn’t good, but being wrong the wronger way is really, really bad… ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2450 "2014-09-10T01:02:48Z")
That’s what you assume happened. What more likely happened is that the appropriate agencies made a funding request and asked for more than they needed. Obama himself is unlikely to have spoken to any “experts”. Coming up with funding requests is almost always a bureaucratic exericise. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2451 "2014-09-10T03:14:06Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > It’s not Obama’s fault, and it’s not necessarily a bad thing. None of us know the “correct” amount to spend on ebola. Unfortunately, it’s natural for people to just listen to the first number they hear and consider that the right amount of funding, and if less than that gets passed, it’s a “cut”. Neither of us know if $40 million gets us better results than $80 million. If that was a sure thing, we’d just spend 10 times that and beat ebola even quicker. OMG. While it’s probably true that “none of us” knows the exact correct amount, do you think the Republiopaths in Congress have a better idea than experts charged with precisely this sort of problem? And the _“if $80 million is better than $40 million, why not spend $800 million?”_ is an example of the logic fallacy Republiopaths make over and over and over again. I wish the fallacy had a special name, but until somebody tells me the special name I’ll just call it _ **Stupidity** _. I remain curious whether Republiopaths have any conception of where money gets spent. Do they worry that Obama plans to divert some of the funding into building Death Camps for the people who don’t sign up for Obamacare? In another thread, I asked **Terr-Rat** , who wanted to completely defund Departments of Education and Agriculture, if he had the slightest clue where that money is spent. Of course he didn’t. Do you, **adaher**? Speaking of **Terr-Rat** , who insists on using “Democ-Rat” where “Democratic” is appropriate, I hope a Mod will inform me if turnabout is fair play. Can we refer to the Republiopaths as Republiopaths outside of BBQ Pit? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2452 "2014-09-10T04:01:18Z")
Never! We are far too genteel and civilized for that sort of unseemly behavior! And, we have people for that. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2453 "2014-09-10T04:10:46Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > OMG. While it’s probably true that “none of us” knows the exact correct amount, do you think the Republiopaths in Congress have a better idea than experts charged with precisely this sort of problem? Again, you assume experts. I assume bureaucrats. > [@](#): > > And the _“if $80 million is better than $40 million, why not spend $800 million?”_ is an example of the logic fallacy Republiopaths make over and over and over again. I wish the fallacy had a special name, but until somebody tells me the special name I’ll just call it _ **Stupidity** _. It’s not a fallacy. At some point, you spend more than is useful on any particular program. Bureaucrats do not, as a matter of habit, look out for the taxpayers. Congress is elected to do just that. Do you believe the “experts” in the Pentagon should have the primary say in how much we spend on defense? > [@](#): > > I remain curious whether Republiopaths have any conception of where money gets spent. Do they worry that Obama plans to divert some of the funding into building Death Camps for the people who don’t sign up for Obamacare? Actually, money gets diverted to unrelated purposes frequently. No, it won’t be for death camps, but it could be for wasteful things. It’s Congress’ job to ensure that agencies get the money they need and not a penny more. > [@](#): > > In another thread, I asked **Terr-Rat** , who wanted to completely defund Departments of Education and Agriculture, if he had the slightest clue where that money is spent. Of course he didn’t. Do you, **adaher**? I’m not an expert on the budget, but yes, I’m sure I know more than the average Doper does without having to look it up. Dept. of Education spends money on student loans, federal aid to local districts, and the Dept. of Agriculture is for some reason where food stamps come from, as well as subsidies and all kinds of scientific programs that occasionally find their way into the press because they are funny-sounding(“Mating habits of dragonflies” type programs). I also know enough about how governments spend to know that “experts” have little to do with it. Experts certainly weigh in, but the recommendations that go to the President when he makes his budget requests go through the bureaucracy first, which has interests of its own. When Congress has time to do its job, as in when people aren’t pressuring them to vote right the hell now without even reading what they are voting on, they can actually interview the experts in hearings and have them justify each line item. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2454 "2014-09-10T04:14:44Z")
BTW, since this is the “stupid liberal idea” thread, “experts making decisions in government” has to be one of the more adorable ones. Liberals have long supported rule by experts. The problem is, we don’t elect experts and the 2.5 million federal employees are mostly not experts. THe real experts have no power unless they are telling the people actually in charge what they want to hear. Remember when the CBO said that X number of jobs would be lost if minimum wage was raised, and one of the President’s economic advisors released a statement claiming that no jobs would be lost? It would be hard to imagine that the President gathered all the best economic minds and came up with that answer. Rather, the PResident appoints the best liberal-oriented economic minds to tell him what he already knows. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 5:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2455 "2014-09-10T05:51:05Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Bureaucrats do not, as a matter of habit, look out for the taxpayers. Congress is elected to do just that. Do you believe the “experts” in the Pentagon should have the primary say in how much we spend on defense? The exact opposite is true. Congress is constantly funding bases and weapon programs, to satisfy constituents, that the D of D doesn’t even want. > [@adaher](#): > > Dept. of Agriculture is for some reason where food stamps come from “… for some reason” – can’t resist getting a dig in on teh styuoopid guvmint, can you? I wish **Terr-Rat** and his ilk understood that when they look at a gross budget breakdown and conclude “Duh … just eliminate the Department of Agriculture,” they’re not talking of taking jobs away from teat-suckling Kenyan lovers working for teh eevul who want to steal your guns. Almost all the D o A budget is food stamps and related programs. If **Terr-Rat** were informed and sincere, he’d have written “Let the people on Food stamps starve” instead of “eliminate Department of Agriculture” … but his ilk are neither. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2456 "2014-09-10T11:45:22Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > The exact opposite is true. Congress is constantly funding bases and weapon programs, to satisfy constituents, that the D of D doesn’t even want. True, because they are also motivated by another factor: jobs, and the DoD probably provides more direct jobs than any other government agency. > [@](#): > > “… for some reason” – can’t resist getting a dig in on teh styuoopid guvmint, can you? > > I wish **Terr-Rat** and his ilk understood that when they look at a gross budget breakdown and conclude “Duh … just eliminate the Department of Agriculture,” they’re not talking of taking jobs away from teat-suckling Kenyan lovers working for teh eevul who want to steal your guns. Almost all the D o A budget is food stamps and related programs. > > If **Terr-Rat** were informed and sincere, he’d have written “Let the people on Food stamps starve” instead of “eliminate Department of Agriculture” … but his ilk are neither. On the flip side, when a new cabinet department is created, most of its programs are not new, they are just consolidated from other departments. The same would be true if a department was eliminated. Some programs would go away, others would go somewhere else. Food stamps would fit just fine under HUD, given that it used to be called the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Most of the time these departments aren’t created to fill a policy need, they are created as a political move to signal an administration’s seriousness. “I care about education, see I created a cabinet level department for it!” ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2457 "2014-09-10T12:00:08Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > On the flip side, … > > Food stamps would fit just fine under HUD, given that it used to be called the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. So what? Do you think that idiot **Terr** thought his cuts would balance the budget without eliminating Food stanps, Pell grants, etc.? You’re smarter than the usual Republicans – hypocrites, racists and gun-nuts – but you’re supposed to dance with them that brought you. If the Republican Party stands for anything (besides Benghazi and voter suppression) it’s saving money by reducing the size of federal government. What’s your plan for that? Government angencies have already been stripped to the bone (due to fixed costs, a 10% cut often reduces effectiveness by 20%). Where are you going to cut, **adaher**? Hungry schoolkids? Veterans? Old people’s healthcare? (We’ve seen the Republiopathic plan for Medicare: boondoggle to feed tax dollars to drug companies.) ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2458 "2014-09-10T12:27:57Z")
I think it might be a permutation of the slippery slope fallacy. And yes, it is a fallacy, and yes it is stupid. We don’t have an infinite supply of money, but obviously spending too little on something like this is bad. Yeah, 800 million probably would be better than 80 million. But we can get the job done with 80 million, and spending 800 million is not _free_. It’s an idiotic fallacious argument, at least in that form. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2459 "2014-09-10T12:31:16Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Government angencies have already been stripped to the bone (due to fixed costs, a 10% cut often reduces effectiveness by 20%). Where are you going to cut, **adaher**? Hungry schoolkids? Veterans? Old people’s healthcare? (We’ve seen the Republiopathic plan for Medicare: boondoggle to feed tax dollars to drug companies.) Well, first, 10% cuts almost never happen, and if costs were so fixed they wouldn’t need increases above inflation every year. THe private sector has to have fixed costs as well, yet there is no company in the private sector that can’t cut costs by 10% without much loss of efficiency. But it’s also true that you can’t balance the budget just by making the government more efficient. Most of the budget these days is entitlements, and in our lifetime the entire budget will be entitlements+defense+interest. As Paul Krugman put it, the federal government will be “an insurance company with an army”. Entitlements will have to be cut and our defense responsiblilities pared back significantly. All non-essential programs should be terminated 20 years ago. Fortunately, one of those, the Ex-Im Bank, looks like it is finally going away. That was a non-essential program that lasted about 70 years too long. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2014, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086/2460 "2014-09-10T12:33:32Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > I think it might be a permutation of the slippery slope fallacy. And yes, it is a fallacy, and yes it is stupid. We don’t have an infinite supply of money, but obviously spending too little on something like this is bad. Yeah, 800 million probably would be better than 80 million. But we can get the job done with 80 million, and spending 800 million is not _free_. It’s an idiotic fallacious argument, at least in that form. I wasn’t suggesting that we spend $800 million, only pointing out that $40 million might be just as effective as $80 million. None of us know what the “right” funding level is, and it’s the job of Congress to look out for taxpayers and cut the fat out of these types of requests. Congress can actually be relied on to do that when we’re not talking about jobs in their districts or handouts to campaign donors. It’s actually nice to see Congress work when it’s an issue that they have no particular political interest in. This is the serious stuff, and they are taking it seriously. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086.md?page=122) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-liberal-idea-of-the-day/579086.md?page=124)