Paul Krugman

Krugman's Cruel Budget Cutting Myths

|

Paul Krugman revisited the Lone Star State yesterday, in another attempt to expose its underlying contradictions.

The Texas legislature is proposing a 10 percent across-the-board cut in Medicaid to help corral its runaway spending. Observing that Texas has low rankings in child poverty, graduation rates, and health, Krugman asks us to think of the children:

Hey kid-Smile now, you're getting taxed later

Tax increases have been ruled out of consideration; the gap will be closed solely through spending cuts. Medicaid, a program that is crucial to many of the state's children, will take the biggest hit, with the Legislature proposing a funding cut of no less than 29 percent, including a reduction in the state's already low payments to providers — raising fears that doctors will start refusing to see Medicaid patients. And education will also face steep cuts, with school administrators talking about as many as 100,000 layoffs.

The really striking thing about all this isn't the cruelty — at this point you expect that — but the shortsightedness. What's supposed to happen when today's neglected children become tomorrow's work force?

This all comes after Krugman's recent column acknowledging that health care costs are the greatest threat to American solvency at both the state and federal level. When citing wellness indicators, he chooses to ignore that Texas has a much larger Hispanic population than average, of whom a third are in poverty. Not good, but absorbing a rate of population growth twice the national average over the last decade does tend to put some stress on institutions. And people are still moving to Texas.

Krugman also feeds the myth that more spending always equals more good. Spending more on schools, for example, means next to nothing: Costs have tripled since the early 1970s, without any noticeable increase in educational outcomes. And whether Medicaid is paying for 58 percent or 62 percent of beneficiary costs doesn't make much difference if the whole program is bloated and ineffective.

More from Reason on the Professor here

NEXT: Reason.tv - Nanny of the Month (Feb 2011): Would-Be Brothel Banner Sen. Harry Reid!

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I hope this crap atleast gets him laid. I mean a sophomore education major gets off on this shit don’t they? Krugabe Coeds 7- The Collective Anus.

    1. Hey, around here he’s known as “Pauly Krugnuts”. Tow the lion, dude.

  2. When citing wellness indicators, he chooses to ignore that Texas has a much larger Hispanic population than average, of whom a third are in poverty.

    You are saying Mexicans are inherently “unwell”? We’re listing Reason as a Koch-fueled hate group

    1. There is nothing wrong with being Koch-fueled. It’s just more than your average brain can understand.

    2. SPLC, since you are the decider of all things Koch, what is difference between delicious Koch and nasty Koch?

      1. Cane sugar or HFCS.

  3. What’s supposed to happen when today’s neglected children become tomorrow’s work force?

    As zombies? I mean, these kids are gonna die and pile up in the streets without medicaid, so I don’t see how else they’re going to find work without a subsidized voodoo taskforce to reanimate them.

    1. My response to that line was closer to “LOL wut?”

  4. Why do people actually listen to him?

    1. HAVE YOU SEEN MY NOBEL PRIZE, FUCKER? WHERE’S YOURS?

      1. WE HAVEN’T SEEN YOUR NOBEL, FUCKER, WE’RE TOO BUSY LOOKING FOR TEDDY ROOSEVELT’S!

  5. “What’s supposed to happen when today’s neglected children become tomorrow’s work force?”

    They’ll move to New York and become unionized teachers.

    1. Yeah, I already the covered the zombie scenario.

  6. Not good, but absorbing a rate of population growth twice the national average over the last decade does tend to put some stress on institutions.

    Absorbing? Aren’t people the engine that drives the creation of wealth?

    Of course, more people means a larger infrastructure will be needed to serve the larger population, so cuts will be a double whammy…but the idea that poor performance is because the state has more taxpayers is just, well, disingenuous.

    1. but the idea that poor performance is because the state has more taxpayers is just, well, disingenuous.

      Sure, if they actually paid taxes.

      1. It’s mostly property and sales taxes in Texas. You can’t avoid them; the immigrants are paying (even if they rent, the taxes in the property are presumably being paid by the owner).

        1. That only helps slightly. They’re still paying far fewer taxes than the rest of the population.

          1. Texas doesn’t have a state income tax. Other than federal taxes like social security and Medicare, what taxes are they not paying?

          2. And probably contributing far more to the state’s GDP than they take out in services. So what?

  7. When citing wellness indicators, he chooses to ignore that Texas has a much larger Hispanic population than average

    Already noted, but what is wrong with the choice to ignore this information?

    And if we don’t ignore it because 1/3rd are in poverty, how does that help make the case that Texas should cut budgets to programs that serve a need that is (presumably) proportionally larger due to this?

    1. Any competent statistician or epidemiologist knows you need to account for demographics, including race and income, to get valid comparisons of health across populations.

      That’s what’s wrong with “choosing to ignore this information”.

      1. RC Dean,

        Any competent statistician knows that what you control for would depend upon the question being explored. In this case, I don’t see how the racial demographics are relevant.

        Can you enlighten me?

        1. Here are how racial demographics are relevant: in the Austin Independent School District, schools are being targeted for closure. The schools with the largest ESL learners are staying open because they get more funding due to their demographics.

          In Williamson County, pre-K is free only if the student is disabled or an illegal immigrant.

          More costs from one sector of the population are relevant.

        2. If you are doing a comparison of the overal health status of two populations, the major variables are mostly demographic, including race and income. Higher earners tend to be healthier, of course. But different racial groups tend to have different health profiles as well. Blacks tend to have high blood pressure, for example. Here’s a handy CDC brochure on Hispanics:

          http://www.cdc.gov/omhd/Brochures/PDFs/HL.pdf

          You just can’t do a valid comparison and ignore demographics. Which is what Krugnuts is trying to do.

          1. If only we remove all the poor and unhealthy people from the equation, Texas has got something pretty good going on!

            1. Go suck a diseased cock, Tony.

        3. Isn’t your background and education in the sciences? How could what R C Dean stated above be mysterious to you?

        4. RC Dean/alan

          Of course all you say is true and not news to me. The problem is that none of those things are relevant to Krugman’s point. Texas is failing to meet the needs of its population, and yet they want to cut programs even farther. The demographics are not an excuse for the failure. They are not relevant.

          1. Another way to put this. Since Texas can’t “factor out” the demographic challenges that their institutions face, those demographics should not be controlled for when discussing outcomes of the state. The claim, I think, that RC Dean is trying to make is that Texas outcomes wouldn’t look so bad if it weren’t for all of those Hispanics in Texas. Another way of saying this is that the poor outcomes in Texas are not the fault of the poor programs in Texas…but are, instead, the fault of the people those programs (fail to) serve.

            Krugman’s basic point, as far as I can tell, is that cutting the budgets of the programs is likely to lead to even greater failure of those programs for the people in Texas. This will lead to even worse outcomes, he speculates. Given that the population of Texas is the population of Texas, controlling for race in the numbers would muddle this point.

            I will note that Krugman’s editorials are less than compelling in general and this one is about on par with his standard.

  8. From Krugman:

    Texas likes to portray itself as a model of small government, and indeed it is. Taxes are low, at least if you’re in the upper part of the income distribution (taxes on the bottom 40 percent of the population are actually above the national average). Government spending is also low. And to be fair, low taxes may be one reason for the state’s rapid population growth, although low housing prices are surely much more important.

    But here’s the thing: While low spending may sound good in the abstract, what it amounts to in practice is low spending on children, who account directly or indirectly for a large part of government outlays at the state and local level.

    And in low-tax, low-spending Texas, the kids are not all right. The high school graduation rate, at just 61.3 percent, puts Texas 43rd out of 50 in state rankings. Nationally, the state ranks fifth in child poverty; it leads in the percentage of children without health insurance. And only 78 percent of Texas children are in excellent or very good health, significantly below the national average.

    1. The high school graduation rate, at just 61.3 percent, puts Texas 43rd out of 50 in state rankings.

      Again, without adjusting for demographics, this is meaningless. Hispanic students, for example, have a high dropout rate. Its partially cultural (education isn’t a priority) and partly economic (they need to go to work).

      1. You are ignoring, perhaps, that the reason, nationwide, that Hispanics have a lower graduation rate is because so many of them go to school in Texas, NM, California, and Florida.

        No?

        1. But they have a higher dropout rate than other people in those states, even, I believe, after correcting for economic factors.

          So it doesn’t matter what state they are in. They still skew high.

          1. Are you sure of that? I haven’t seen that broken down. And, of course, that still leaves the possibility that the schools in those states are specifically, for some unknown reason, serving this subset of the population less well. I could posit that it may have something to do with ELL, but I would just be guessing.

            1. Important note: the best predictor of school success is not race, but parent’s level of education. Followed by income. These are FAR more important things to control for than race…

              1. And yet the parent’s race has a lot to do with their level of education, considering how many Hispanic parents are dropouts.

              2. Any good economist (or sociologist…), when running the regression to look for statistical significance would include all of those in their analysis. It’s not enough to just say “the average in Texas is lower than the average in other states” because without controlling for other circumstances, the numbers don’t mean shit.

                1. Dave,

                  re: the numbers don’t mean shit.

                  Depends upon how they are being used. You know that. The average is the average. If the purpose is to lump all Texans, regardless of race, and compare to other states without controlling for race, then the averages mean something. You are trying to introduce a claim about causality that I don’t think is implied in the piece.

            2. Are you sure of that?

              Pretty sure, yes. The Hispanic dropout rate runs 2 – 3 time that of whites.

              the best predictor of school success is not race, but parent’s level of education.

              Sure, but it gets to be a tomatoe/tomatoh issue when you are talking about an ethnic group where the parents aren’t very educated, either.

              Regardless, without correcting for it, the comparison is invalid.

        2. Are you claiming California’s small government philosophy is the reason Hispanics there drop out of school so much?

          1. No.

            1. Well, then, you can no doubt understand my confusion given that what’s being claimed about Texas in the Krugman quote, which you neither expanded nor commented on.

              1. You crazy fool! You’ve employed logic!

              2. KPres,

                I was making a different point. RC Dean wants to blame the poor graduation rates of Hispanics on a kid-centric factor. He ignores an alternative explanation…that Hispanic students drop out because their needs are not being met by the school systems. The states I listed may must have schools that don’t meet the needs of their student population. It is easy to blame the kids…but working in education, I don’t think that flies. Programs can be designed that will meet the needs of these kids.

                Texas blaming their demographics for their poor outcomes boils down to saying “It isn’t our programs that are the problem, Texans are just an unhealthy, unteachable mob.”

        3. Re: Neu Mejican,

          You are ignoring, perhaps, that the reason, nationwide, that Hispanics have a lower graduation rate is because so many of them go to school in Texas, NM, California, and Florida.

          http://www.nizkor.org/features…..ffect.html

          1. Yes, OM,
            This is why I did not make a causal statement, but, instead, speculated regarding one possible, among many, causal explanations. I doubt the “race” of a student is a large factor in their chances of HS graduation. It may be a proxy for some complex set of causes, but it is not really an important factor.

            1. Of course it’s an important factor. Race corresponds directly to their parents which corresponds with their parents’ education level. Your political correctness is pathetic.

              1. Not to mention IQ (now you’re REALLY not supposed to bring that one up), which correlates pretty well with dropout rates as well. But, of course, it’s absurd to fathom that something like IQ could have any conceivable causal connection with performance in education.

                1. Of course it’s an important factor. Race corresponds directly to their parents which corresponds with their parents’ education level…
                  KPres|3.1.11 @ 4:09PM|#

                  Not to mention IQ

                  Sigh. Race doesn’t “directly correspond” with IQ. Even the strongest claims are for it to explain around 5% of the variation between groups. And, importantly, Flynn’s work has shown the source of that variation to be primarily driven by…get this…the degree of infrastructure support for health and education available to the groups. Somehow relevant to this discussion.

              2. If I’d known Neu was coming I wouldn’t have had to spoof the “issue”.

            2. It may be a proxy for some complex set of causes, but it is not really an important factor.

              Sure, I don’t think anyone would say Hispanics are genetically predisposed to dropping out.

              But, the point continues to be that a comparison that does not correct for these known variables (even if the variables are a proxy) is invalid.

              1. Correcting for known variables meaning ignoring the segments of the population that make the outcome look bad?

                1. *sigh*

                  This is basic statistics, kids.

                  Controlling for known variables means you are trying to ISOLATE the actual effect; in this case the effect being health/education out comes in Texas vs. other states.

                  When you say it “makes the outcome look bad” you mean that it might not give the same bullshit results that Krugman came to, and that’s your own personal judgement being injected.

                  1. Krugman is arguing that the policy changes at hand (budget austerity) will have negative effects on future outcomes in a state with already dismal stats. If he were talking about the causes of the current stats, you might have a point. Krugman is incorporating the current stats into an argument about future policy, and curiously everyone’s wanting to dismiss them with patronizing racist hand-waving.

                    1. Krugman is arguing that the policy changes at hand (budget austerity)

                      And yet California has dismal stats as well. Budget austerity has nothing to do with it. Play the racist card all you’d like, but there’s a huge constant in both of these states–a large Hispanic population.

                    2. there’s a huge constant in both of these states–a large Hispanic population.

                      And? That tells me that not only do these states have big problems, there are problems that are magnified in racial minorities, which is itself a big problem. It’s not an excuse to ignore bad metrics.

                    3. A large Hispanic population, or a large population of relocated Mexican peasants?

                      Therefore, what is being corrected for is not so much a broad ethnic category, but a cultural category. A significant percentage of should not be in an American school in the first place.

            3. Whatever the cause, it’s a fact. How do we fix it? Throwing more money at the schools hasn’t worked. What will?

              1. Making parents responsible for their children’s education?

              2. Fatty,
                This is, indeed, why there is no need to control for these factors. And, yes, throwing money at it does not solve the problem. Likewise, cutting services is unlikely to help.

        4. No. Hispanics have a serious gap in grad rates almost everywhere.

          You can look at here to see. I’m sure there are other sources. This one tries to separate state reported grad rates from “real” grad rates.

      2. Who cares? They are every bit as much people, hence part of the overall equation, as white people.

        1. Endogenous vs. exogenous variables. Also, statistics in general. Please go learn more before commenting on this again.

    2. All of which is explained by demographics.

    3. Re: Neu Mejican,

      While low spending may sound good in the abstract, what it amounts to in practice is low spending on children[.]

      Sure, because the children are supposed to belong to the State – how silly can one be to think otherwise, right???

      And in low-tax, low-spending Texas, the kids are not all right. The high school graduation rate, at just 61.3 percent, puts Texas 43rd out of 50 in state rankings.

      And obviously, Krugman happens to be the king of the nitwits that believe throwing money at a “problem” will solve it.

      Sorry, Krugman, but the reason people do not graduate from High School is because HS sucks. Not just American HS’s, just in general, because they purport to give oversexed teenagers information they couldn’t care less about.

    4. And New York’s graduation rate is low, too. WHAAATTT??! Doesn’t NY spend any money on schools?

  9. Texas is as close to heaven as one can find within the Empire, and since a huge part of our funding problems are caused by the Feds and their mandates, I can’t wait until we break off again. Lefties can stop complaining about us, and we’ll be free to do as we see fit.

    Now, on the other hand, we do have a real problem with the “tuff on crime” rhetoric, hatred of the concept that people should be free to use drugs, our conceal / carry permit sucks, and a lot of bible thumpers. There are several organized movements against teh gheyz here (against marriage that is). We need to get over this crap to finish what the economics has started (in regards to liberty).

    1. Texas also has problems with handing over huge subsidies to corporations, even foreign corporations (toll companies). Low spending? Maybe in comparison, but not objectively.

      1. I forgot about that, but you are absolutely correct Zoltan. We’re big on crony capitalism for the insurance industry, as well. Have to protect the public from black mold, you know.

  10. since a huge part of our funding problems are caused by the Feds and their mandates

    A part, surely, but not the majority of the problem, just as surely. Texans need to take ownership of their own mess.

    1. Well, the numbers move around, but around half the budget shortfall in Austin is in the Medicaid program. Throw in a few more un(der)-funded mandates, and you’ve got the majority of the problem, right there.

    2. Which is exactly what they’re doing, to Krugman’s chagrin.

  11. I may have a problem with the idea that medicaid is underfunded. Are you saying the federal contribution should be larger?

    1. I’m saying that the federal mandates for how Medicaid should be run prevent the state from reforming Medicaid. The feds don’t fund the inefficiencies that they mandate.

  12. The Texas legislature is proposing a 10 percent across-the-board cut in Medicaid to help corral its runaway spending. Observing that Texas has low rankings in child poverty, graduation rates, and health, Krugman asks us to think of the children[.]

    Oh, shit… Thank you, Krugnuts! Now I am going to see the Houston Chronicle going at it until kingdom come.

    1. Now I am going to see the Houston Chronicle going at it until kindergarten come.

      That’s how I read it.

    2. Maybe they could compare pre- and post- Katrina rates if they’re gonna do features.

  13. Krugman also feeds the myth that more spending always equals more good.

    Nooo! Really???

    Spending more on schools, for example, means next to nothing: Costs have tripled since the early 1970s, without any noticeable increase in educational outcomes.

    “Facts are of no use to me!”
    PK

  14. New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, and Texas are top four on teen birth rates.

  15. We also kick most of the country’s ass on teen suicide.

    Go SW!!!!

    1. According to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention’s 2007 statistics, New Mexico is 3rd, Nevada is 5th, Arizona is 8th, and Texas is 41st.

      Alaska, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and Oregon are all in the Top 10 so I’d say Northwest is worse.

      1. Disregard this, NM said teen suicide, not total suicide.

        1. Is there really a huge difference in teen vs. adult suicide? NM, NV, and AZ are all top 10, TX is 41st. Unless the only people in TX committing suicide are teenagers then I doubt TX rises so much that it isn’t a quintile or two from the other three states mentioned.

      2. I actually don’t tend to include Texas in the “SW.” Although lots of West Texas has a SW feel, culturally (particularly El Paso), for the most part the state feels more like The South to me.

    2. But if you correct for all the suicidal teens, the stats all work out.

    3. “Go ask anyone, ‘Teenage Suicide, Don’t Do It’ is the number one song on the radio.”

      1. What’s your damage, Brett?

  16. A total non-rebuttal.

    The GOP and Reasonoids have turned “Krugman” into a slang epithet, and no substantive argument is required when slinging it around. Indeed, engaging Krugman’s various analyses on a substantive level would just be interpreted as a sign of “weakness” and “lack of resolve” among this crowd. Staying superficial and vague is a requisite of the “True Faith” around here.

    “Texas is more Hispanic!” “The population is growing!” This is a proper excuse and explanation for the dismal and even shocking social conditions in that state? Shove it sideways, Brokaw.

    1. Not bad, but you needed to make a pun on the word reason. Preferably using “scare quotes”.

    2. If you want to see shockingly dismal social conditions, you should look at Mexico, the place a large percentage of these new Texas residents have fled from. Oh also, Los Angeles.

    3. Right, kick ass. Well, don’t want to sound like a dick or nothin’, but, ah… it says on your chart that you’re fucked up. Ah, you talk like a fag, and your shit’s all retarded.

      1. LOLWinner!

    4. Krugman doesn’t even make substantive arguments. It isn’t an excuse that Texas having a large population of people from a third world country accounts for a part of its low education rankings and other statistics.

    5. Gabriel Daniel Martin Ciociola was born in 1971 in Wilmington Delaware. He graduated from Boston College in 1992 with a B.A. in Philosophy. In 1996 he received a Juris Doctorate from Harvard Law School. After clerking for state and federal courts in Boston, he worked for five years as a civil litigator in private practice. He is now a Staff Attorney at the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. He resides in Salem, Massachusetts.

      Your own state can’t keep their medical costs under control, kettle. Now you’re just some tool who works for the government.

    6. Reasonoids have turned “Krugman” into a slang epithet,

      No, we haven’t.

      We call him Pauly Krugnuts, and use that as a slang epithet.

      Try to keep up, OK?

    7. Re: Danny,

      Indeed, engaging Krugman’s various analyses on a substantive level would just be interpreted as a sign of “weakness” and “lack of resolve” among this crowd.

      You don’t read.

      This is a proper excuse and explanation for the dismal and even shocking social conditions in that state?

      Ha ha ha ha!!!

      “Dismal”? “Shocking social conditions”? You have NO FUCKING IDEA of what you’re talking about, NONE.

  17. “The really striking thing about all this isn’t the cruelty ? at this point you expect that ? but the shortsightedness. What’s supposed to happen when today’s neglected children become tomorrow’s work force?”

    So, the entire workforce will consist of people who would have been on Medicaid as children?

  18. Texas, and the spittle-flecked fury with which governor Rick Perry is defended around here from all comers, is Exhibit #1 in my assessment that 95% of the glibertarians at this Reasonoid outfit would be perfectly happy to see a gulag-style of government, so long as the great mass of the police-power force was directed against the poor.

    Texas may have bad schools, bad Medicaid coverage, and weak programs for children, but it has a vast and munificent system of prisons and juvenile detention centers, and they are among the most savage and abusive examples of such institutions in the nation.

    Nary a word is said around here about Rick Perry’s war on drugs, war on women’s reproductive rights, or his state political party’s call for a Uganda-style RECRIMINALIZATION of “sodomy,” but whenever the horrifying Paul Krugman has the audacity to criticize social conditions in that oversized cattle-pen, the gang’s all here, braying and stomping like Texas is some kind of minarchist paradise.

    Please. For once, spare us. Enough already.

    1. Yeah, Reason constantly defends the police state, the war on drugs, high imprisonment rates, government intrustion in the bedroom, and corporatists like Rick Perry.

      Did they not teach reading comprehension and critical thinking at Boston College, Dannyboy? Or does working for the state really cause a massive loss of intelligence?

      As for being an “oversized cattle-pen”, tell that to the people who move here and make this state the fastest-growing in the country. I guess they all want a piece of the third-world pigpen that is Texas!

      1. 1) Silence speaks volumes.

        2) “this state” — sounds like you’re from Texas. And you were probably educated in its schools, eh? Well … thus endeth the lesson.

        1. I was “educated” in Florida, Ohio, Texas, Washington, and Indiana schools. I learned elsewhere.

          You can either address my argument that Reason defends Perry when it comes to state sovereignty and lower spending in certain areas while criticizing him for executing innocent people and being a blind corporatist…or say I was educated in Texas schools and thus stupid.

          Well, you were educated in Massachusetts schools and you either lack the ability to read Reason’s criticisms or you are plainly ignorant of their existence altogether. Not surprising as you are a leech on the taxpayers and unable to comprehend why even that is wrong.

          And you still haven’t addressed why so many people from other states want to move here.

          Here’s a hint, Masshole: On the top right is a search bar. Type “rick perry” and you’ll see there’s no silence against Rick Perry’s shenanigans.

          1. “…And you still haven’t addressed why so many people from other states want to move here….”

            Let’s see: (1) Texas is so bad because it has too many immigrants swelling its population, but (2) immigrants keep swelling its population, so Texas isn’t so bad.

            Tell you what, voltron, you finish debating yourself before asking anybody else to debate you.

            1. And you still haven’t addressed why so many people from other states want to move here

              Again, apparently Massachusetts schools don’t teach reading comprehension, not even at the college level. It’s probably not even required for taxpayer leeches.

              While there is a huge immigrant population, both legal and illegal, I specifically said people from other states because they are yet another reason why the Texas population is booming.

              1. (Nota Bene: Texas imports a lot of inmates from other states into its prison system. Another reason voltron is so proud of his shitkicker republic. yeehaw!!!)

                1. So a 23-year-old college dropout who works in the private sector just schooled a 40-year-old with a law degree who leeches off taxpayers for his paycheck and now he’s making shit up about me?

                  Danny, request a refund from your alma mater and get a job that isn’t paid for at the point of a gun. Then stop making shit up about me.

                  1. I may have failed to treat you with the contempt you deserve, but I treated you with all the contempt I could muster. No more could reasonably asked of a mortal.

                    (Anyway, for all we know, you’ve been “making shit up” about yourself the whole time. Who cares? You count for nothing in any event.)

                    1. Treating me with contempt instead of facing the legitimacy of my arguments. Let’s get this straight, Gabriel “Danny” Daniel Martin Ciociola–tax-payer leech and law school graduate, you refuse to understand or comprehend that:

                      1. Reason has criticized Rick Perry far more than they applaud him. You called Reason “silent” on these matters, even though a simple site search proves you wrong.

                      2. You couldn’t understand a simple sentence that accounted for Texas’s population growth from other states, as opposed to Central America, and then tried to “gotcha” me though you were completely wrong.

                      3. Now you’re trying to pretend as if I support large-scale imprisonment and the importation of prisoners to Texas (no thanks, more of a taxpayer burder, moron).

                      Massachusetts schools have failed you, Danny. And now poor Massachusetts taxpayers are paying the salary of an illiterate, ignorant fool.

    2. the spittle-flecked fury with which governor Rick Perry is defended around here from all comers,

      I haven’t seen a single defense of Rick Perry. I’m a Texan, and I kick Gov. Hair in the nuts (rhetorically!) every chance I get.

      So WTF are you talking about?

      1. Reason has defended him for standing up against the federal government in regards to Obamacare. Perry is at least clear on the 10th Amendment and that is why Reason is covering his actions regarding state sovereignty and Medicaid. Other than that, there’s a lot about his complicity in the murder of innocent people.

    3. Texas, and the spittle-flecked fury with which governor Rick Perry is defended around here from all comers, is Exhibit #1 in my assessment that 95% of the glibertarians at this Reasonoid outfit would be perfectly happy to see a gulag-style of government, so long as the great mass of the police-power force was directed against the poor.

      You are exhibit no #1 of the solved case that the left are intellectually bankrupt and have to lie to make a point.

    4. Re: Danny,

      Texas, and the spittle-flecked fury with which governor Rick Perry is defended around here from all comers[…][????}

      You don’t read and miscontrue a critique of Krugman as a “defense” of Perry. So this means a) you’re a moron and b) you’re a delusional moron.

      Nary a word is said around here about Rick Perry’s war on drugs

      The war on drugs is national, not jst local… moron.

      war on women’s reproductive rights

      You mean war on abortion? Because “abortion” and “reproductive rights” are NOT the same thing. Besides this, there’s no war on abortion itself, none, only in funding them with MY FUCKING MONEY, which I don’t want. You want an abortion? Go and pay for one yourself!

      or his state political party’s call for a Uganda-style RECRIMINALIZATION of “sodomy,”

      Bullshit.

      1. ‘Bullshit’

        “Texas Sodomy Statutes ? We oppose the legalization of sodomy. We demand that Congress exercise its authority granted by the U.S. Constitution to withhold jurisdiction from the federal courts from cases involving sodomy.”

        http://tinyurl.com/233vhl7

        Page 7 of 25.

        https://www.1888932-2946.ws/TexasGOP/E-ContentStrategy/userfiles/2010_RPT_PLATFORM.pdf

        Listen to me closely:

        you.
        are.
        nothing.

        1. “you.
          are.
          nothing.”

          So sayeth the pipsqueak.

          LOL

        2. And now we come to the real crux of the matter.

          While I think that any legislation dealing with this type of behavior is just silly, my suggestion to you is that you stay in Massachusetts where your participation in these activities remains legal.

  19. It’s not a pretty picture; compassion aside, you have to wonder ? and many business people in Texas do ? how the state can prosper in the long run with a future work force blighted by childhood poverty, poor health and lack of education.

    Import educated labor from India and China, everyone else does the work that Americans don’t want to do, but will have to do.

  20. When citing wellness indicators, he chooses to ignore that Texas has a much larger Hispanic population than average, of whom a third are in poverty.

    $10 says that the wellness and education levels of Texas’s Hispanic population are better then their Mexican counter parts.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.