McGrath,

When we tried to create a semi-public rail system in the US (called AmTrak), the privately owned railroads cheerfully sold the unprofitable passenger lines and poorly maintained tracks to the new corporation and kept the profitable freight lines (that had been subsidizing passenger trains). And then Congress puzzled over why AmTrak kept not making money. Why they had to poor money into upgrading and repairing and why, as services and schedules kept getting cut (due to budget cuts) rider ship declined.

Conversely, on the private side, some years ago (after the bureaucracy finally got some control over medicare so hospitals couldn't pad bills as easily) one of the major private hospital ownership companies collected all their hospitals that weren't making much money, or losing money, and spun off another corporation of doubtful value. They used the pension fund of the employees in the new corporation to pay the old parent company for their interest in the new company.

Fortunately they got caught. Strangely the liberal media that covered the failure of AmTrak, (and blamed the Liberals for it, barely mention the second incident.

Or when the liberals proposed and passed the highly controversial (at the time) minimum wage increase, the liberal press failed to mention that there was 125 billion included in tax breaks and so on for corporations

Then we come to the latest "evidence" of the liberal media conspiracy. Never mind that the vast majority of the media outlets arfe run by fairly conservative and Conservative men and women, or that the Boards are dominated by same. Instead, lets find/manufacture clear evidence of liberal bias. Or at least claim it exists.

But why? One reasonable answer is that if you characterize the press as a liberal conspiracy, you don't have to answer the charges. Just fall back on "There they go again". If you can't win on the facts, baffle them with bullshit.

Regards and Happy Holidays

John

troll, only you would have a discussion with a hallucination about a recipe whose antecedents have no basis in fact. Sorry to, for of course you don't argue with Ivan as you tend to support his methods of government, social interaction and so on.