home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: ne.politics
- Path: sparky!uunet!noc.near.net!mv!siia!drd
- From: drd@siia.mv.com (David Dick)
- Subject: Re: Butt-Fucked in Massachussetts
- Message-ID: <1992Nov21.170349.26652@siia.mv.com>
- Organization: Software Innovations, Inc.
- References: <BxzHz8.HMq@world.std.com> <By1HqJ.EMt@world.std.com>
- Distribution: usa
- Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 17:03:49 GMT
- Lines: 29
-
- In <By1HqJ.EMt@world.std.com> lmh@world.std.com (Larry M Headlund) writes:
-
- >In article <BxzHz8.HMq@world.std.com> rjk@world.std.com (robert j kolker) writes:
-
- [some vituperation elided]
-
- >> The vast majority of the middle class
- >>(or what is left of it) do *not* want to support the basket cases of the
- >>world through tax financed government programs. In additon to being
- >>unloved and immoral, this approach is fraudulent, since 60 cents(at least)
- >>of every dollar raised in taxes for the comfort of the poor, ends up in
- >>the burocracy anyway. Besides how many of you wan't to support slutty
- >>young woman in their occupation of making babies they can't afford to feed
- >>and educate. Screw'em and let them starve.
-
- > Assuming you are refering to income transfer payments, the ratio
- >of direct benefits to administration is more like 4 to 1. And if you reduce
- >administration costs then you are also eliminating the oversite that
- >catches cheats.
-
- *reducing* administration costs does not necessarily mean
- *eliminating* the oversite that catches cheats.
-
- A better way to put it would be to say that some of the administrative
- cost is necessary to catch cheating, in order to avoid either
- higher total costs, or less of the funds going to the intended recipients.
-
- David Dick
- Software Innovations, Inc. [the Software Moving Company]
-