Breastfeeding= Nanny State

So the government providing financial incentives and support to people and entities which should be and, in the vast majority of cases are, capable of providing for their own activities is not indicative of a nanny state? We'll just have to agree to disagree.

The way I see it, the government, for whatever their reason, deciding AGAINST taking tax dollars from you, is the opposite of a nanny state.

Except it is not a matter of not taking tax dollars from the general public. It's a matter of selectively not taking tax dollars from a special group of people. Thereby shifting the tax burden to others to pay for a select group's crap.
 
I have to share this because Shittoo just reminded me of quite a few people who think they have a right to money from the government, and who also think that anyone who objects to insane spending should receive nada....

Well I was thinking of AssieBubble's post, about the welfare of this mother, that if she ever hit the lotto or came into a sum of money, she would be required to repay the state for the aid she received.

So why shouldn't Bachmann be required to re-pay the thousands in farm subsidy money, now that she is worth millions? She should receive nada as well.

Because farm subsidy money is what the government pays farmers to give up their autonomy and farm as they're told. Usually, the government is paying them NOT to farm, because, much as it would like to, lefty govt can't FORCE them not to farm.
 
Oh really? :lol:

I'm sure our billionaires will be thrilled. But then again, I can see how you would be aghast at tax breaks for common people

You didn't answer the question on top of barfing up more "made on the spot" bullshit.

Where did I say we needed more tax cuts for billionaires, RW? Wait, why should I ask a question being you have managed to NOT answer a single one so far.

Did Obama and the Dems pass tax cuts for billionaires RW… Does that make Obama “evil” for giving billionaires tax cuts like you tried to make me out to be? Or because he is black with a D next to his name is it A`OK, just like his support and expansion of the Wars, homeland security, HC , torture and so on, just like Bush… RW, you’re a neocon, and I base that on the very simple fact that you support a president and congress that by definition are neocons.

You were against the Bush tax cuts when Bush did them, but when Obama did them you were only against the part for rich people, but you liked to point out all of the tax cuts for "common people." Man you're an easy target.

No.....actually if you read my posts at the time, I was against the tax cuts in total. I opposed borrowing $2 trillion to pay for tax cuts which proved under Bush not to create jobs. I wanted the money to go to deficit reduction
Now we are cutting spending just to make up for extending the tax cuts
Obama sold out

props.
 
Logical fallacy. Again.

Maybe you can splain it

How is govt encouraging oil drilling not a "Nanny State"??
While encouraging breastfeeding is?

Our Government Withholds, Taxes & Leases Oil Drilling Rights & Exploration!!! It also taxes oil production, transportation & sale of oil. It also imposes massive oil drilling, exploration EPA restrictions & regs. Where on earth do you get govt encouraging oil drilling???
 
Last edited:
Logical fallacy. Again.

Maybe you can splain it

How is govt encouraging oil drilling not a "Nanny State"??
While encouraging breastfeeding is?

Our Government Withholds, Taxes & Leases Oil Drilling Rights & Exploration!!! It also taxes oil production, transportation & sale of oil. It also imposes massive oil drilling, exploration EPA restrictions & regs. Where on earth do you get govt encouraging oil drilling???

Then they use that evil oil to make breast pumps.
 
Please don't let the next post be anything about volunteers, oil, and breasts.
 
I'm learning about logical fallacies. So I''m practicing my critical thinking skills by identifying them in myself and others. Though of course now I'm looking for them, I'm not going to make them. Or maybe I am..that in and of itself is a no-no in critical thinking, but an idiot like Liefinger will never catch on, and I have the added benefit of watching him cry in public.

win win!
 
Breast pumps themselves are a non-issue a 50 dollar item will yield maybe a 20 buck tax break. What is the issue is that the government is being called a nanny state for advocating healthy activities
It once again shows the pettiness and vindictiveness of Bachmann
The first lady has every right to advocate breastfeeding and trying to remove restrictions in the workplace
Does Bachmann even know what a nanny state is?

evidence please, links?

:eusa_whistle:

:eusa_whistle:
 
I'm learning about logical fallacies. So I''m practicing my critical thinking skills by identifying them in myself and others. Though of course now I'm looking for them, I'm not going to make them. Or maybe I am..that in and of itself is a no-no in critical thinking, but an idiot like Liefinger will never catch on, and I have the added benefit of watching him cry in public.

win win!

Or we could just dispense with the nit-picky bullshit and talk about the larger issues.

Bachman thinks it's idiotic to fund breast pumps to encourage women who are below the poverty line to breast feed.

Considering the relative health benefits to mother and child of breast feeding versus bottle feeding, I think it's pennies on the dollar.

I mean, the government funds circumcision which is basically a cosmetic surgery that's health benefits are so minuscule that it's hard to make an argument for circumcision with a straight face. We basically do it, because of our judeo-christian heritage.

Why is funding something with proven health benefits such a controversial notion?
 
I'm takling about the *bigger* issues.

Shall we start with the lie that is the thread title, or the ridiculous assertion that anyone is advocating that women be discouraged from breast feeding? When the topic becomes serious, so will I. But why waste good thought and honest discourse on liars?
 
Oh, sorry..did I interupt the *serious* discussions of plethoras of breasts and pumping volunteers? I'm sorry....
 
I'm takling about the *bigger* issues.

Shall we start with the lie that is the thread title, or the ridiculous assertion that anyone is advocating that women be discouraged from breast feeding? When the topic becomes serious, so will I. But why waste good thought and honest discourse on liars?

Bachman doesn't support government funding for breast pumps. The government funds other, more absurd medical interventions, like circumcisions. Why quibble over funding something that has proven health benefits?

Serious enough for you?
 

Forum List

Back
Top