Time was, the USA was THE country for engineering marvels, and not just in “the private sector.” This is now just another area in which the philosophy of the GOP, and especially the tea party, is to give up: “We, acting together as a nation, are incapable of doing just about anything right, and shouldn’t even try. Beyond maintaining armed forces and a penal system, we might as well stop pretending govern or provide for ourselves, and just leave every individual to govern and fend for himself as best he can, ‘every man for himself and the devil take the hindmost.’”
@wmconelly – I think you and I agree to the extent that spending money on infrastructure is a good use of public funds. Where we DISAGREE is on who’s public funds should be used.
Perhaps I am reading too much into your scolding of Republicans (Because Democrats have been so interested in spending money on infrastructure) but I read here you think the Federal Government should foot the bill for this Metro station – using funds they harvested from taxpayers all across the United States. I think the DC metro system should be funded with tax dollars harvested from tax payers right there in DC by the very people who benefit from the project.Increase the fares or, better yet, levy a gas tax.
Those of us who choose not to live in cities see Enormous portions of our tax dollars sucked into the cities by Federal and State taxing authorities to pay for: Roads, Public transportation, FIOS, Public Housing, Parks, Underfunded schools etc. etc. We are tired of paying for someone else’s free, or more accurately, subsidized lunch.
I think all of the public goods mentioned in the previous chapter are noble but those who benefit should be those who pay.
@Doughfoot – Quite often, when I hear a liberal complain that the Republicans want a country of every man for himself; I can show you a person who sees life as unfair and wants a government that robs his neighbor to pay for something he or she wants.
Many of the regulations that the conservatives would eliminate are the ones put in place by Liberals to make the Industrious responsible for the care and feeding of the indolent.
The Frank Dodd act comes to mind. It was supposed to make us Safe from Big banks that would destroy the economy but what it really did was create an enormous bureaucracy and cost corporations (all corporations) BILLIONS of private dollars to comply. If we really were afraid of big banks we could have limited the holdings of each bank and been done with the problem.
I’m all for Laws and Regulations that keep property rights strong. I’m not so supportive of laws and regulations that slow down economic activity because the lazy and the stupid can’t keep up.
Quite the Rant SoP – and to be clear I am neither dishonest nor disingenuous.
And since were talking about debating strategies let me comment on creating an incredibly weakened straw man and then knocking it down.
I, personally, am not responsible for the bills that were advanced by Republicans (Or Democrats for that matter). I vote for the party that brings the US closer to the ideal I would like to see where people are Prosperous, Free, and Independent. I’m sure you don’t agree with every law and regulation propagated by Democrats (though I could be wrong on that matter).
I do object to Minimum wage laws and Worker compensation laws because I see them as impediments to employment for those who lack job skills. They make lower production workers unaffordable and then the Democrats point to their unemployment and say – See!!! This is why we need welfare and foodstamps.
I don’t object to anti-pollution regulations because that is an area where one citizen can encroach on the rights and freedoms of another. By polluting my neighbors water I am, in effect, taking from him.
I do grow weary of the term “Greedy Corporation”. Corporations are just a financial entity. They are owned by investors like Me, and Charities, and Pension funds, and exist to maximize profits for their owners. When they purchase anything (Labor, raw materials, etc.) they try to minimize their costs while maximizing their output – Not unlike any other household in the country.
Now I challenge you to be intellectually honest and ask yourself why Corporations want the Frank Dodd act dismantled. Do you honestly believe it is just because it stops them from making risky investments? Obviously not. The Frank Dodd act costs every corporation (Banks, Manufacturers, Stores, etc.) Billions to comply (Lawyers, Accountants, Computer Systems, Engineers). It is stupendously expensive and the same objective could be reached with lower costs but they managed to put all the costs on the share holders like a hidden tax.
Most of the programs coming out of Washington for as long as Obama has been in office have been intended to help the little guy – But they assumed that those of us who deal honestly and fairly with our fellow man would just happily sit by and allow the costs of these programs to be placed on our shoulders while the fools (yes that’s what they were) that got swept up in the exuberance of the market overbought and destroyed their own credit. Well – We aren’t happy to accept costs for other peoples mistakes.
Go back a few years. I was one of the first to say Let the big banks fail. I am not a defender of any company that stupidly takes risks and expects the government to bail them out. Those of us with good credit and smart investments were doing fine. New banks would have sprung up out of the ashes of the dinosaurs and credit would have started rolling again. Moral hazard should be applied to stupid consumers and stupid investors alike.
But the way things are today – Every company I want to own as an investment is saddled with billions in government regulations that take away from my bottom line.
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
All very good comments. Allow me to posit that we all have some common ground: that we believe government should work to improve the lives and conditions of all citizens, be it roads, protection from invaders, power grid, safe drinking water, and trustworthy food supply..the list can go on.
But where the problem comes in is not how much to spend, which seems to be the major concern of political parties, but how to spend intelligently.
We don’t need Dodd-Frank. We had a perfectly workable system before we repealed Glass-Steagle, and we can easily (if we had the political will) restore it.
Simpler: put a wall between commercial banks and investment banks. You can only be one; you cannot be both. This way, if the investment bank fails because of foolish derivatives trading, for example, the bank fails, and the investors lose their investment. But those of us who put money into our checking accounts are not responsible for paying the gambling debts of those risk-takers. No more too big to fail, and therefore not too big to jail. Just one example.
There are ways to invest in our society smartly, and which will benefit our entire society, elevating our quality of life. We currently do not have “representatives” who are committed to doing so, because they are more than willing to repeat the same mistakes that their overlords tell them to try.
Once again, it comes down to the voting public doing its homework and voting for smart people with good ideas. It is obvious that voting based on whether there is a “D” or an “R” after their name is not going to work longterm.
WRONG! Do your homework before touching the keyboard.http://blog.metrotrends.org/2013/01/urban-rural-trends-snap-participation-on/If you were half as smart as you think you are you woild have used this as evidence,http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ382722
I, too worked in a plastic injection molding factory. I was running a machine that ground up the leftover PVC which releases sodium chlorite. I was breathing it and it was brutal on the lungs. I had to go to the shop steward (oh, those evil unions) to get a mask. Then there was the job installing insulation. No protection whatsoever. you took it (asbestos)home on your clothes and transferred it to your wife and kids. The solution? “Wear a long sleeved shirt kid”I challenge all the anti union pseudo-cons to go work in a factory, not a summer job in college, but working 40 hours a week to raise a family. Then come back and tell us how much damage the safety regs do to the company. For the real deal head down to Mexico and you’ll see what this country was like before unions and gubmint regulations.
Carl Premium Member over 9 years ago
Who ever saw a working escalator at a Metro station?
Doughfoot over 9 years ago
Time was, the USA was THE country for engineering marvels, and not just in “the private sector.” This is now just another area in which the philosophy of the GOP, and especially the tea party, is to give up: “We, acting together as a nation, are incapable of doing just about anything right, and shouldn’t even try. Beyond maintaining armed forces and a penal system, we might as well stop pretending govern or provide for ourselves, and just leave every individual to govern and fend for himself as best he can, ‘every man for himself and the devil take the hindmost.’”
Mephistopheles over 9 years ago
@wmconelly – I think you and I agree to the extent that spending money on infrastructure is a good use of public funds. Where we DISAGREE is on who’s public funds should be used.
Perhaps I am reading too much into your scolding of Republicans (Because Democrats have been so interested in spending money on infrastructure) but I read here you think the Federal Government should foot the bill for this Metro station – using funds they harvested from taxpayers all across the United States. I think the DC metro system should be funded with tax dollars harvested from tax payers right there in DC by the very people who benefit from the project.Increase the fares or, better yet, levy a gas tax.
Those of us who choose not to live in cities see Enormous portions of our tax dollars sucked into the cities by Federal and State taxing authorities to pay for: Roads, Public transportation, FIOS, Public Housing, Parks, Underfunded schools etc. etc. We are tired of paying for someone else’s free, or more accurately, subsidized lunch.
I think all of the public goods mentioned in the previous chapter are noble but those who benefit should be those who pay.
Mephistopheles over 9 years ago
@Doughfoot – Quite often, when I hear a liberal complain that the Republicans want a country of every man for himself; I can show you a person who sees life as unfair and wants a government that robs his neighbor to pay for something he or she wants.
Many of the regulations that the conservatives would eliminate are the ones put in place by Liberals to make the Industrious responsible for the care and feeding of the indolent.
The Frank Dodd act comes to mind. It was supposed to make us Safe from Big banks that would destroy the economy but what it really did was create an enormous bureaucracy and cost corporations (all corporations) BILLIONS of private dollars to comply. If we really were afraid of big banks we could have limited the holdings of each bank and been done with the problem.
I’m all for Laws and Regulations that keep property rights strong. I’m not so supportive of laws and regulations that slow down economic activity because the lazy and the stupid can’t keep up.
Barbara Chicco Premium Member over 9 years ago
quite the rant
magicwalnut Premium Member over 9 years ago
Thank you, Christopher. Saved me the trouble.
Mephistopheles over 9 years ago
Quite the Rant SoP – and to be clear I am neither dishonest nor disingenuous.
And since were talking about debating strategies let me comment on creating an incredibly weakened straw man and then knocking it down.
I, personally, am not responsible for the bills that were advanced by Republicans (Or Democrats for that matter). I vote for the party that brings the US closer to the ideal I would like to see where people are Prosperous, Free, and Independent. I’m sure you don’t agree with every law and regulation propagated by Democrats (though I could be wrong on that matter).
I do object to Minimum wage laws and Worker compensation laws because I see them as impediments to employment for those who lack job skills. They make lower production workers unaffordable and then the Democrats point to their unemployment and say – See!!! This is why we need welfare and foodstamps.
I don’t object to anti-pollution regulations because that is an area where one citizen can encroach on the rights and freedoms of another. By polluting my neighbors water I am, in effect, taking from him.
I do grow weary of the term “Greedy Corporation”. Corporations are just a financial entity. They are owned by investors like Me, and Charities, and Pension funds, and exist to maximize profits for their owners. When they purchase anything (Labor, raw materials, etc.) they try to minimize their costs while maximizing their output – Not unlike any other household in the country.
Now I challenge you to be intellectually honest and ask yourself why Corporations want the Frank Dodd act dismantled. Do you honestly believe it is just because it stops them from making risky investments? Obviously not. The Frank Dodd act costs every corporation (Banks, Manufacturers, Stores, etc.) Billions to comply (Lawyers, Accountants, Computer Systems, Engineers). It is stupendously expensive and the same objective could be reached with lower costs but they managed to put all the costs on the share holders like a hidden tax.
Most of the programs coming out of Washington for as long as Obama has been in office have been intended to help the little guy – But they assumed that those of us who deal honestly and fairly with our fellow man would just happily sit by and allow the costs of these programs to be placed on our shoulders while the fools (yes that’s what they were) that got swept up in the exuberance of the market overbought and destroyed their own credit. Well – We aren’t happy to accept costs for other peoples mistakes.
Go back a few years. I was one of the first to say Let the big banks fail. I am not a defender of any company that stupidly takes risks and expects the government to bail them out. Those of us with good credit and smart investments were doing fine. New banks would have sprung up out of the ashes of the dinosaurs and credit would have started rolling again. Moral hazard should be applied to stupid consumers and stupid investors alike.
But the way things are today – Every company I want to own as an investment is saddled with billions in government regulations that take away from my bottom line.
JohnHarry Premium Member over 9 years ago
Hey MEPH, guess you never read this
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
I Play One On TV over 9 years ago
All very good comments. Allow me to posit that we all have some common ground: that we believe government should work to improve the lives and conditions of all citizens, be it roads, protection from invaders, power grid, safe drinking water, and trustworthy food supply..the list can go on.
But where the problem comes in is not how much to spend, which seems to be the major concern of political parties, but how to spend intelligently.
We don’t need Dodd-Frank. We had a perfectly workable system before we repealed Glass-Steagle, and we can easily (if we had the political will) restore it.
Simpler: put a wall between commercial banks and investment banks. You can only be one; you cannot be both. This way, if the investment bank fails because of foolish derivatives trading, for example, the bank fails, and the investors lose their investment. But those of us who put money into our checking accounts are not responsible for paying the gambling debts of those risk-takers. No more too big to fail, and therefore not too big to jail. Just one example.
There are ways to invest in our society smartly, and which will benefit our entire society, elevating our quality of life. We currently do not have “representatives” who are committed to doing so, because they are more than willing to repeat the same mistakes that their overlords tell them to try.
Once again, it comes down to the voting public doing its homework and voting for smart people with good ideas. It is obvious that voting based on whether there is a “D” or an “R” after their name is not going to work longterm.
Best of luck to us all.
attarian over 9 years ago
WRONG! Do your homework before touching the keyboard.http://blog.metrotrends.org/2013/01/urban-rural-trends-snap-participation-on/If you were half as smart as you think you are you woild have used this as evidence,http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ382722
attarian over 9 years ago
I, too worked in a plastic injection molding factory. I was running a machine that ground up the leftover PVC which releases sodium chlorite. I was breathing it and it was brutal on the lungs. I had to go to the shop steward (oh, those evil unions) to get a mask. Then there was the job installing insulation. No protection whatsoever. you took it (asbestos)home on your clothes and transferred it to your wife and kids. The solution? “Wear a long sleeved shirt kid”I challenge all the anti union pseudo-cons to go work in a factory, not a summer job in college, but working 40 hours a week to raise a family. Then come back and tell us how much damage the safety regs do to the company. For the real deal head down to Mexico and you’ll see what this country was like before unions and gubmint regulations.