|
Stuff about taxes
I know, Texas should be like California, Michigan and New York, where taxes are extremely high, but they have enough money to balance their budgets and supply services efficiently. And, yeah, it would be nice if the unemployment rate and new business start ups were like those states here.
Oh, wait, all of those states are broke! And are shedding private businesses like crazy. And have high unemployment and extremely inefficient governments.
I'll keep Texas, thanks. Oh, and that example you linked? That was Tennessee. We put fires out here.
The problem isn't the amount of tax people pay, the problem is government inefficiency and waste. If my taxes were just going to roads, fire departments and police, we'd have great roads, fire departments and police. But politicians have to sell out our future to get votes now.
We don't have enough money to pay for everything the left wants as long as they insist on allowing government to be wasteful and catering to public service unions, and some day they'll have to realize that.
And, if you knew anything about Houston, we have some of the highest property taxes in the nation here. Not as bad as, say, New Jersey, but pretty damned high.
Stuff about taxesI know, Texas should be like California, Michigan and New York, where taxes are extremely high, but they have enough money to balance their budgets and supply services efficiently. And, yeah, it would be nice if the unemployment rate and new business start ups were like those states here.
Oh, wait, all of those states are broke! And are shedding private businesses like crazy. And have high unemployment and extremely inefficient governments.
I'll keep Texas, thanks. Oh, and that example you linked? That was Tennessee. We put fires out here.
The problem isn't the amount of tax people pay, the problem is government inefficiency and waste. If my taxes were just going to roads, fire departments and police, we'd have great roads, fire departments and police. But politicians have to sell out our future to get votes now.
We don't have enough money to pay for everything the left wants as long as they insist on allowing government to be wasteful and catering to public service unions, and some day they'll have to realize that.
And, if you knew anything about Houston, we have some of the highest property taxes in the nation here. Not as bad as, say, New Jersey, but pretty damned high.
Disagree with you on all the same stuff I usually disagree with you on, but I KNEW it wasn't Texas doing that Fire Department crap. I just wasn't sure who it was. TN, huh? Bad idea all around.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I never understood the fire department thing myself
As I understand it...
We had a situation down home where the 'gray area' between two towns was better defined, but one town was letting the other town make the runs. They didn't take care of their own people until the other town started billing them for the runs. It's similar in that my town was providing services to people who didn't pay for them (in taxes) and as a result was becoming unable to provide the same services to our residents.
I never understood the fire department thing myself
As I understand it...
** spoiler omitted **We had a situation down home where the 'gray area' between two towns was better defined, but one town was letting the other town make the runs. They didn't take care of their own people until the other town started billing them for the runs. It's similar in that my town was providing services to people who didn't pay for them (in taxes) and as a result was becoming unable to provide the same services to our residents.
I'm not local to said area, but that kinda stuff would NOT fly up here. My heart goes out to the guy who lost his house, and a meaty fist to the fire chief who, if the story is to be believed, had to ensure that noone assisted the man with putting out the fire, more or less just sitting back and watching the home burn.
|
|
Disagree with you on all the same stuff I usually disagree with you on, but I KNEW it wasn't Texas doing that Fire Department crap. I just wasn't sure who it was. TN, huh? Bad idea all around.Stuff about taxesI know, Texas should be like California, Michigan and New York, where taxes are extremely high, but they have enough money to balance their budgets and supply services efficiently. And, yeah, it would be nice if the unemployment rate and new business start ups were like those states here.
Oh, wait, all of those states are broke! And are shedding private businesses like crazy. And have high unemployment and extremely inefficient governments.
I'll keep Texas, thanks. Oh, and that example you linked? That was Tennessee. We put fires out here.
The problem isn't the amount of tax people pay, the problem is government inefficiency and waste. If my taxes were just going to roads, fire departments and police, we'd have great roads, fire departments and police. But politicians have to sell out our future to get votes now.
We don't have enough money to pay for everything the left wants as long as they insist on allowing government to be wasteful and catering to public service unions, and some day they'll have to realize that.
And, if you knew anything about Houston, we have some of the highest property taxes in the nation here. Not as bad as, say, New Jersey, but pretty damned high.
Just out of curiosity, what are you disagreeing with? Outside of NYC, the economy in NY state is miserable (the state's unemployment overall is 8.3% or so, but if you take NYC out of the picture, it jumps dramatically), and all three of those states are objectively broke, it isn't an opinion. And all three states have, objectively, much higher taxes than the national average.
I know you disagree with my stance on taxation and social services, so no need to explain if that was the disagreement.
Are you from Houston, TX? Texas could really use more taxes - I have/had friends there, and the social system & infrastructure seriously needs the money. That's really the deal with all taxes - real property, income, "vice taxes", etc. - the gov't needs money for common purpose things like roads, schools, bridges, police & fire departments, and water & sewer systems. You know, all those conveniences of modern American living that you don't want to lose in favor of keeping a little more money in your pocket.The fire department example shows what can happen - if you don´t pay the infrastructure by taxes, you have to pay it directly, or suffer the consequences. (Nevertheless, the fire example is nothing short of atrocious - I would sue the fire department for failure to render assistance in the least.) Want a road to your house? Have fun building it, or paying some company to do so. Public schooling? Well, if you can´t afford to pay for it, your kids are out of luck and will get no education, and most probably no job. Water? Build a cistern, and dig a hole for the waste. Police? Well I guess you have to pay for that, but if you can afford only minimum payment, you will get only minimum service.
I believe fire departments have the same immunity to being sued for failure to provide service as law enforcement. Regardless of how much some one in the US pays in taxes law enforcement has zero requirement to protect anyone who is not in custody.
If the road to my home is on my property I should pay for it not the taxpayers.
Public schools I already pay for regardless of whether I'm using them or not, and they do an abysmal job for the most part. Many of us have decided that taking our kids out of a failing public school system is the only responsible parental choice yet we must still pay to educate our kids directly as well as paying to prop up the failing public school system.
As for water and sewer many of us do build our own wells and septic systems in addition to having our taxes subsidize government water and sewer monopolies.
I find the "privilege" of supporting a bloated corrupt bureaucracy to be over rated.
Wow.
You think that New York's fiscal problems are the result of NY taxes being too low. The root cause (if I understand your argument) is that tax payers and businesses just aren't giving enough money to the state.
How about CA? Do they have the same problem?
|
|
Funny, New York is ranked #2 in highest tax burden, state and local, in the nation. And, for most years between 1978 and now it was ranked #1. California is #6.
Michigan is #27, but they have a slew of business hostile laws and union issues that keep employers away.
Maybe the problem is excessive spending, inefficiency and corruption, and not revenue?
Texas, by comparison is #43. And several businesses are relocating here from California. I wonder why?
I just can't wrap my mind around how a lot of people seem to have this dogmatic belief that government is the solution to basically every problem.
|
It just bothers me that once you purchase something, you don't actually own it. They can still tell you what to do with it and how.When we're talking about tangible products - computer hardware, for example - I can agree with the business argument against you taking apart their product to reverse-engineer it and sell a competing, mostly-identical product. That's the basis behind the "analog" versions of copyright & patent law. But when companies fight against derived products with independent, unforeseen uses as potential competitors, I think that's going too far. Companies are exploiting the government's reasonable support of the former to gain back-door support for the latter. It's fair, as citizens, to start calling shenanigans.
Even with tangible products I dislike being told what I can or can't do with an item I purchased. Patents, copyrights, trademarks and things of that nature are there to protect the IP so even if I do take it apart if there is proprietary hardware/software in the products I can't reproduce it legally. If someone is going to reproduce it illegally it doesn't matter whether they tell them they can or not because they would still do it. So the only people affected are those that aren't trying to steal. Modding a product is no different with an x-box than with a car. Ford can't tell me that I can't put low profile rims and a cherry bomb on my mustang if I want, Microsoft shouldn't be able to either. I paid for it, it is mine do mod or smash with a hammer if I want.
As others have mentioned it really bothers me when government tells me what I can or can't do with my body. While I do think that businesses should be made to tell us the truth about their products, so we can atleast make informed decisions, I do not think anyone can tell us whether we can use the product or not. As far as I am concerned no one has the right to pass a law that tells me what I can or can not do in regards to my own physical body. If I want to drive my low rider mustang off a clif while I smoke, drink, eat McDonald's and play with my modded X-box that's my choice.
I don't actually drink, own a modded x-box and am afraid of heights so the cliff is a no go, but I think you get the idea. If I want to do those things no one has the right to tell me otherwise.
Even with tangible products I dislike being told what I can or can't do with an item I purchased. Patents, copyrights, trademarks and things of that nature are there to protect the IP so even if I do take it apart if there is proprietary hardware/software in the products I can't reproduce it legally. If someone is going to reproduce it illegally it doesn't matter whether they tell them they can or not because they would still do it. So the only people affected are those that aren't trying to steal. Modding a product is no different with an x-box than with a car. Ford can't tell me that I can't put low profile rims and a cherry bomb on my mustang if I want, Microsoft shouldn't be able to either. I paid for it, it is mine do mod or smash with a hammer if I want.
As others have mentioned it really bothers me when government tells me what I can or can't do with my body. While I do think that businesses should be made to tell us the truth about their products, so we can atleast make informed decisions, I do not think anyone can tell us whether we can use the product or not. As far as I am concerned no one has the right to pass a law that tells me what I can or can not do in regards to my own physical body. If I want to drive my low rider mustang off a clif while I smoke, drink, eat McDonald's and play with my modded X-box that's my choice.
I don't actually drink, own a modded x-box and am afraid of heights so the cliff is a no go, but I think you get the idea. If I want to do those things no one has the right to tell me otherwise.
I agree, but I think that everything you have mentioned is regulated or criminalized somewhere or another in the US.
Well, considering who is in charge of educating our children, is it any wonder?I just can't wrap my mind around how a lot of people seem to have this dogmatic belief that government is basically at fault for every problem.
Double fixed. And one I didn't even have to fix!!
Double fixed. And one I didn't even have to fix!!Well, considering who is in charge of educating our children, is it any wonder?I just can't wrap my mind around how a lot of people seem to have this dogmatic belief that government is basically at fault for every problem.
:)
I assume the irony of education being run by the government is not lost on you. ;)
Double fixed. And one I didn't even have to fix!!Well, considering who is in charge of educating our children, is it any wonder?I just can't wrap my mind around how a lot of people seem to have this dogmatic belief that government is basically at fault for every problem.
:)
I assume the irony of education being run by the government is not lost on you. ;)
I swear, for april fool's, I'm putting a giant scary government blow up doll in your closet set up to fall on you the instant you open the door.
Wow.
You think that New York's fiscal problems are the result of NY taxes being too low. The root cause (if I understand your argument) is that tax payers and businesses just aren't giving enough money to the state.
How about CA? Do they have the same problem?
No, I said that NY's taxes were too low on finance, insurance & real estate/construction businesses during the highly-profitable, but ultimately devastating boom period. Business taxes are to industry what personal savings are to individuals - a safety buffer for when times are hard. Or do you think that businesses can be trusted to rein in greed and save for lean times on their own?
California has its own problems to deal with, especially with its key industries - agriculture, media/tech, and tourism - in flux. Plus they have to fight their own climate issues. But all that profligate spending/taxcutting and the whole energy boondoggle certainly didn't help any.
Rankings don't have much to do with anything - all of the states eventually bought into similar BS about making a "business-friendly" tax climate. States were cutting each others' throats in an attempt to woo fickle businesses (for jobs, I understand the angle). Except now that workers/consumers across the country are struggling to stay afloat, and states/muni's are broke, those same businesses have no problems jumping ship for even "friendlier" climes in other countries. Any Northeast town is full of abandoned commercial spaces and even...Funny, New York is ranked #2 in highest tax burden, state and local, in the nation. And, for most years between 1978 and now it was ranked #1. California is #6.
Michigan is #27, but they have a slew of business hostile laws and union issues that keep employers away.
Maybe the problem is excessive spending, inefficiency and corruption, and not revenue?
Texas, by comparison is #43. And several businesses are relocating here from California. I wonder why?
You do NY proud, Mandisaw. I'm so glad I met you for ten minutes that one day in the taco place!!
Oh, and I never said NY (or any state) didn't have crazy problems with government inefficiency or corruption (NY pols treat grift as a high art!), but that's what political activism, watchdog groups, town halls, and elections are for. I just don't understand folks who just want to chuck it all rather than own up to our job as citizens.
There is the key distinction. You seem to believe the job of a citizen is to surrender more and more power to a government that you admit is corrupt and inefficient. I seriously doubt that you even practice what you preach. Would you have voted for vermin like Charlie Rangle, or would you have fired him?
I believe the job of a citizen is to defend human rights against their most dangerous predators.
The notion that people who value freedom and human rights aren't doing our job as citizens is an interesting attack, but it's shockingly vacant and false on it's face. Rumor has it a few folks who value freedom got involved in the last election too. You can keep your oppression, corruption, and corporate whore president. I prefer freedom, and that's why I do my job as a citizen to stand up for the Constitution and fight against those who wish to subvert and destroy it.
The problem with public involvement is that our awareness seems to extend only to the latest sound byte. or you'd know that Charles Rangel is actually one of the better politicians who unfortunately made some very unwise choices and will pay a price for them. As far as vermin being elected to public office... we elected a President who got us into a war we're still dealing with on evidence for a claim which did not exist.There is the key distinction. You seem to believe the job of a citizen is to surrender more and more power to a government that you admit is corrupt and inefficient. I seriously doubt that you even practice what you preach. Would you have voted for vermin like Charlie Rangle, or would you have fired him?
+1. The bolded part gets a +2. I've never had anything but nice things to say about Charlie from my dealings with him as someone who lives in Brooklyn, and the allegations, and then the guilty verdicts that came down on him hurt me on a personal level. He let me down. I don't want him to swing by the neck for it, but I DO want him to pay for what he's done, even as I try to remember the good times.
The problem with public involvement is that our awareness seems to extend only to the latest sound byte. or you'd know that Charles Rangel is actually one of the better politicians who unfortunately made some very unwise choices and will pay a price for them. As far as vermin being elected to public office... we elected a President who got us into a war we're still dealing with on evidence for a claim which did not exist.There is the key distinction. You seem to believe the job of a citizen is to surrender more and more power to a government that you admit is corrupt and inefficient. I seriously doubt that you even practice what you preach. Would you have voted for vermin like Charlie Rangle, or would you have fired him?
I concur that Bush was an idiot, but the notion that Rangle "is actually one of the better politicians" is a sad symptom of how deeply corrupt government has become. Millions of Americans would agree with your opinion of Rangle, but I would argue that the chair of the committee that imposes corrupt and draconian tax laws on the nation should be in prison for violating that same labyrinth of laws. It seems that we have simply accepted that it's OK for the rich and powerful on both sides to be held to a far lower standard than the working people who suffer under the laws the powerful impose. This isn't just the law makers, but those who own them as well. The bail outs are another perfect example of this absurd double standard too. It all makes me nuts.
+1. The bolded part gets a +2. I've never had anything but nice things to say about Charlie from my dealings with him as someone who lives in Brooklyn, and the allegations, and then the guilty verdicts that came down on him hurt me on a personal level. He let me down. I don't want him to swing by the neck for it, but I DO want him to pay for what he's done, even as I try to remember the good times.The problem with public involvement is that our awareness seems to extend only to the latest sound byte. or you'd know that Charles Rangel is actually one of the better politicians who unfortunately made some very unwise choices and will pay a price for them. As far as vermin being elected to public office... we elected a President who got us into a war we're still dealing with on evidence for a claim which did not exist.There is the key distinction. You seem to believe the job of a citizen is to surrender more and more power to a government that you admit is corrupt and inefficient. I seriously doubt that you even practice what you preach. Would you have voted for vermin like Charlie Rangle, or would you have fired him?
I just can't agree that the lawmakers should be held to a lower standard than those they impose those laws on. I think they should be held to an even higher standard. For example the fact that our last two presidents used illegal drugs but are in charge of a law enforcement system that prosecutes millions of nonviolent drug offenders is utterly absurd, but we just seem to accept that this lunacy is the norm. The list of hypocrisy and abuse of power is too long to review yet we just keep letting them have more money and more power. The government fails to perform its most basic functions competently, but we reward these failures with more money and power with every passing year. This seems like a deeply insane repetition of destructive behavior to me. These people are utterly unworthy of the power that the voters have given them. They hide behind secrecy, power and fear mongering, and we allow them to accrue and abuse ever more and more power. The war on drugs, the Patriot act, the trillions of dollars spent in the war on poverty, and countless other abject government failures perpetrated in the name of the American voters just grow and grow, and we just keep letting it happen. I'm only one voice among hundreds of millions, but I for one will not sit quietly by while our freedoms are destroyed by the government and those who own it.
To come back to the topic somewhat, I have a huge issue with the idea of criminalizing inanimate objects because they might be misused somehow. Crimes should be a behavior that directly harms or threatens someone else as opposed to an object. Modifying a piece of electronics because it might be used for pirating seems to me like criminalizing bolt cutters and crowbars because a burglar might use them. I know that "burglar tools" are illegal in many jurisdictions and I find this utterly absurd. Where does it stop?
|
|
I just can't agree that the lawmakers should be held to a lower standard than those they impose those laws on. I think they should be held to an even higher standard. For example the fact that our last two presidents used illegal drugs but are in charge of a law enforcement system that prosecutes millions of nonviolent drug offenders is utterly absurd, but we just seem to accept that this lunacy is the norm. The list of hypocrisy and abuse of power is too long to review yet we just keep letting them have more money and more power. The government fails to perform its most basic functions competently, but we reward these failures with more money and power with every passing year. This seems like a deeply insane repetition of destructive behavior to me. These people are utterly unworthy...+1. The bolded part gets a +2. I've never had anything but nice things to say about Charlie from my dealings with him as someone who lives in Brooklyn, and the allegations, and then the guilty verdicts that came down on him hurt me on a personal level. He let me down. I don't want him to swing by the neck for it, but I DO want him to pay for what he's done, even as I try to remember the good times.The problem with public involvement is that our awareness seems to extend only to the latest sound byte. or you'd know that Charles Rangel is actually one of the better politicians who unfortunately made some very unwise choices and will pay a price for them. As far as vermin being elected to public office... we elected a President who got us into a war we're still dealing with on evidence for a claim which did not exist.There is the key distinction. You seem to believe the job of a citizen is to surrender more and more power to a government that you admit is corrupt and inefficient. I seriously doubt that you even practice what you preach. Would you have voted for vermin like Charlie Rangle, or would you have fired him?
+1. The reason I don't trust the government is because I don't trust the American people to look beyond their partisan crap and the sound bite and throw the bums out when they prove unworthy. We aren't failing our civic duty by not wanting to feed more money into a failed, corrupt, inefficient and wasteful system, we're failing our civic duty by not insisting our "leaders" stop being corrupt, inefficient, wasteful failures.
And for forgetting the faces of our forefathers. People haven't changed in the last 250 years, and those guys understood people. Technology =/= evolution, and we are just as petty, ignorant and easily swayed by b&+#+!+* as we were 200, 500, 2000, 5000 years ago. If people had changed, we'd never read Plato, Pliny, Shakespeare, or Jefferson, since all that came before would be irrelevant to our world. So, when I hear someone say "but we live in different times", yeah, we do, but we are still people.
The people who created this nation knew something about history (which, apparently, we've forgotten) and human nature. They knew that once government changed its function from protecting people form each other to protecting people from themselves we were screwed. And once you started giving people things from other people it would never stop.
I love how one side of the political debate invokes Jefferson all the time. Sometimes I think they've never actually read anything the dude wrote. Had they bothered, they'd know he'd take one look at us and conclude his efforts were for naught and the American experiment was a failure. We are ignorant, we are weak and we are easily swayed by lies and hate. And that is all partisan politics are is hate. Look at what people call those who decided the status quo is no longer acceptable. Pelosi called them "astroturf". I guess because they didn't have union leaders to ship them places to protest. The press labeled them "teabaggers" (very insulting, btw) and racists (even after it was found that a vast majority of those holding such signs were plants) and went out of their way to not show the decently representative number of people at their rallies who weren't white or middle/upper class. And the rank and file supporters of the "party of tolerance" reserved some of their most vile comments for those people.
Yeah, I'm sure Jefferson would be proud.
We continue to complain education doesn't get enough money, even though the kids who go to private school (and do better in every facet of education) have an average of $2,000 less per student going towards their education (public info, look it up). But if we try to hold teachers accountable, we're told we don't care about children.
We continue to support bad policy (stimulus package, a very poorly conceived health care plan) blindly, even though the nations one side of the debate look to for inspiration are quickly backing away (and at quite a political cost, if the rash of riots are any indication) from much of what we are pushing for. Europe, Canada and Australia all recovered from the slump more quickly than we did (and we're not even close to recovering yet), without putting their nations in a deeper hole in two years than their political predecessors did in the previous eight (and that eight year hole was mind boggling deep). And those nations attempted to share their wisdom with our "leader", telling him he was not doing it right, and he ignored them. The world may have (correctly) thought Bush was an idiot, but now they think the new guy (after a brief honeymoon "hoping" things would "change") is an arrogant idiot. When you have both Der Speigel and The Guardian (U.K.) writing (only partially tongue in cheek) editorials wondering if maybe the world wasn't better off with Bush, you have to wonder how poorly the non-ignorant-masses people think of the new guy.
I suspect that, if we ever do what we need to to right the ship and secure a future for our children (and not rob from them to satisfy our need for instant gratification), we will see riots like they had in Great Britain, Belgium, Spain, Portugal and Greece. Because we are a shallow, selfish, ignorant people who think the universe owes us something.
Sad, really.
...I just can't agree that the lawmakers should be held to a lower standard than those they impose those laws on. I think they should be held to an even higher standard. For example the fact that our last two presidents used illegal drugs but are in charge of a law enforcement system that prosecutes millions of nonviolent drug offenders is utterly absurd, but we just seem to accept that this lunacy is the norm. The list of hypocrisy and abuse of power is too long to review yet we just keep letting them have more money and more power. The government fails to perform its most basic functions competently, but we reward these failures with more money and power with every passing year. This seems like a deeply insane repetition of destructive behavior to me. These+1. The bolded part gets a +2. I've never had anything but nice things to say about Charlie from my dealings with him as someone who lives in Brooklyn, and the allegations, and then the guilty verdicts that came down on him hurt me on a personal level. He let me down. I don't want him to swing by the neck for it, but I DO want him to pay for what he's done, even as I try to remember the good times.The problem with public involvement is that our awareness seems to extend only to the latest sound byte. or you'd know that Charles Rangel is actually one of the better politicians who unfortunately made some very unwise choices and will pay a price for them. As far as vermin being elected to public office... we elected a President who got us into a war we're still dealing with on evidence for a claim which did not exist.There is the key distinction. You seem to believe the job of a citizen is to surrender more and more power to a government that you admit is corrupt and inefficient. I seriously doubt that you even practice what you preach. Would you have voted for vermin like Charlie Rangle, or would you have fired him?
Unfortuntately HD, a lot of this sounds a lot like "those who disagree with me are just plain wrong and will always be", just with more fire, brimstone, and historical references. YES, we are, and will always be people, warts and all. As will you.
RE: Teabaggers- I thought they chose that name for themselves? Really bad decision that they were rightfully ribbed for, although some of the later coal-dragging was childishly stupid.
RE: Racist plants- This is straying into tinfoil hat territory. There are going to be people who agree with me politically who are quite racist. Just because two vote the same way and agree with on a lot doesn't mean that one person can be racist and the other can't. Unfortunately.
|
|
Unfortuntately HD, a lot of this sounds a lot like "those who disagree with me are just plain wrong and will always be", just with more fire, brimstone, and historical references. YES, we are, and will always be people, warts and all. As will you.
RE: Teabaggers- I thought they chose that name for themselves? Really bad decision that they were rightfully ribbed for, although some of the later coal-dragging was childishly stupid.
RE: Racist plants- This is straying into tinfoil hat territory. There are going to be people who agree with me politically who are quite racist. Just because two vote the same way and agree with on a lot doesn't mean that one person can be racist and the other can't. Unfortunately.
Again, disagree with what? That our politicians are corrupt, inefficient and don't represent us? That's your prerogative, I suppose. That Thomas Jefferson would be repulsed by what our government has become? That's a pretty easy inference to draw from his writings and personal correspondence, actually. That European, Canadian, Australian and Chinese leaders told Obama his policies were misguided and would drag our recession out longer? Well, that's public information. That continuing to run disgusting budget deficits will saddle our children with a pile of debt they won't be able to get out from under? That's pretty much conventional wisdom in most circles. That several European countries suffered riots when their governments figured out they couldn't afford to keep going the way they were and decided to cut back on some programs? Nope, it happened, nothing to disagree with there.
People still think the protesters were hurling racial slurs at members of the Black Caucus before the health care vote, in spite of the fact that the dozens of media cameras and mics and hundreds of personal recordings of the protest and congressmen never caught one incident of a racial slur being used. I guess it's easier to lie about something than admit maybe a bunch of people are tired of politics as usual.
And, no, the Tea Party never referred to themselves as "tea baggers", someone quipped they should "tea bag" the White house before the White house "tea bagged" them. The press and Dem politicians took it from there.
The difference in per student expenditure between private and public schools? Again, public information. Nothing to disagree on. Unless you're going to point out that the very exclusive secular private schools (less than 20% of the private education providers) invalidates the fact that religious affiliated private schools (80%) graduate more kids, with higher SAT scores and college graduation rates for less money than public schools spend. We are tied with Switzerland, ranking #1 in the world, in spending per student. Now, if we're spending more per student than any country in the world other than Switzerland, why do our students fare so poorly against much of the industrialized world? Washington D.C. spends the third highest per student inthe nation, yet their schools are a disaster. Why would we think more money is the answer and not maybe hold the people working in the education system accountable? And, why are more than half of public school employees not teachers? Do we really need a 1:1 ratio of teachers and administrators? Why are we using our public education system as a jobs program and not focusing that money on teaching children? Again, all public information.
So, all I can think of is you disagree that our system is corrupt, inefficient and run by people who don't represent us, but represent special interests and lobbyists. Since most of my above post is based on easily found public information, I can't see what else you'd disagree with.
Again, disagree with what? That our politicians are corrupt, inefficient and don't represent us? That's your prerogative, I suppose. That Thomas Jefferson would be repulsed by what our government has become? That's a pretty easy inference to draw from his writings and personal correspondence, actually.Unfortuntately HD, a lot of this sounds a lot like "those who disagree with me are just plain wrong and will always be", just with more fire, brimstone, and historical references. YES, we are, and will always be people, warts and all. As will you.
RE: Teabaggers- I thought they chose that name for themselves? Really bad decision that they were rightfully ribbed for, although some of the later coal-dragging was childishly stupid.
RE: Racist plants- This is straying into tinfoil hat territory. There are going to be people who agree with me politically who are quite racist. Just because two vote the same way and agree with on a lot doesn't mean that one person can be racist and the other can't. Unfortunately.
With respect to the first part of your statement, I would more point at what happened to Espada in the Bronx up my way. Once people found out he was so crooked he was screwing his pants on in the morning, he was voted out of office. Are things so black and white that our politicians are either perfect and infallible beings who are doing the collection humanity a great favor by taking time out of their day to govern us or horrible pieces of excrement unfit to walk upright?
With respect to the second part, TJ was also a rather hypocritical dude. That much can also be inferred from his writings as well, but is often ignored by those who are using his more noble works as a basis for their statements. I'm not aiming this at you specificially, nor would I, it's just something I've noticed over the years with that guy specifically.
That European, Canadian, Australian and Chinese leaders told Obama his policies were misguided and would drag our recession out longer? Well, that's public information.
Fair enough, but I also recall great public outcry against any and all foriegn leaders who would dare criticise american policy, as well as a general dislike by those same foriegn leaders of any american policy that does not put money directly into their pockets.
That continuing to run disgusting budget deficits will saddle our children with a pile of debt they won't be able to get out from under? That's pretty much conventional wisdom in most circles.
This is where I'm talking about everyone either agrees with me or is horribly, terribly wrong.
That several European countries suffered riots when their governments figured out they couldn't afford to keep going the way they were and decided to cut back on some programs? Nope, it happened, nothing to disagree with there.
Yup.
People still think the protesters were hurling racial slurs at members of the Black Caucus before the health care vote, in spite of the fact that the dozens of media cameras and mics and hundreds of personal recordings of the protest and congressmen never caught one incident of a racial slur being used. I guess it's easier to lie about something than admit maybe a bunch of people are tired of politics as usual.
It could be easier. Or it could be that those whose tapes had racist(whether perceptual or factual/actual) stuff on them simply didn't come forward with them or put forth more tame versions of their tapes instead. Or that those people who had a problem with politics as usual suddenly came together when a black man was in the office of the presidency. I can be just as conspiracy theorist as this mode of thought too, but unless you can prove that every single individual who attended that event was not racist in any way whatsoever, we're not going to get anywhere.
And, no, the Tea Party never referred to themselves as "tea baggers", someone quipped they should "tea bag" the White house before the White house "tea bagged" them. The press and Dem politicians took it from there.
I could have SWORN some people on Meet the Press were eagerly saying they were Teabaggers a while back, even though others were laughing at them or trying to tell them they were embarrasing the movement or something.
We continue to support bad policy (stimulus package, a very poorly conceived health care plan) blindly, even though the nations one side of the debate look to for inspiration are quickly backing away (and at quite a political cost, if the rash of riots are any indication) from much of what we are pushing for. Europe, Canada and Australia all recovered from the slump more quickly than we did (and we're not even close to recovering yet), without putting their nations in a deeper hole in two years than their political predecessors did in the previous eight (and that eight year hole was mind boggling deep). And those nations attempted to share their wisdom with our "leader", telling him he was not doing it right, and he ignored them. The world may have (correctly) thought Bush was an idiot, but now they think the new guy (after a brief honeymoon "hoping" things would "change") is an arrogant idiot. When you have both Der Speigel and The Guardian (U.K.) writing (only partially tongue in cheek) editorials wondering if maybe the world wasn't better off with Bush, you have to wonder how poorly the non-ignorant-masses people think of the new guy.
That the devil one knows is better than the devil one doesn't is a philosophy that has been around long before either of us were a gleam in our parent's eye, and will continue to exist long after we are dust.
P.S- HA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! IE hiccuped and almost made me lose everything- but I COPIED AND PASTED! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
P.P.S- Okay. So I lost the part on education. Sadly, its the part I agree with you the most on. Actually, I agree with you on a lot of topics, even in this post which on the surface seems to be something we would be at each other's throats on, but I think the main problem with both you and me and with politics in this country(perhaps not around the world though) is largely a matter of implementation, not base philosophy.
|
|
True. I'm not objectively against helping people out in need, I just get very bent out of shape when people say we need more money, and refuse to address the very wasteful system of getting people that help we have now. Especially in education. We could probably provide everyone with a stellar education, shiny and wonderful health care and a B.M.W. M5 with what the government collects now, were it not for bureaucratic waste and fraud.
When I was locked up, I was the lead clerk for UNICOR, and I found a ton of ways the place could save money and run more efficiently. Some of those ideas were implemented, but a lot of them couldn't be, because they ran afoul of hardwired rules the system has in place, like having to use GSA approved vendors, allowing vendors who did not have products that 100% fit the needs of the end users bid on contracts (forcing us to use said parts and getting complaints from the undercover F.B.I., D.E.A., A.T.F., Secret Service and D.H.S. guys who needed everything 100% hidden - and this actually led to one death in the field when an undercover was "made" because we had to use a crappy part from one vendor who underbid the vendor who made exactly what we needed). Also, we had to spend x amount of money or lose funding the next year.
The system is hard wired to be wasteful. That's what offends me more than anything.
True. I'm not objectively against helping people out in need, I just get very bent out of shape when people say we need more money, and refuse to address the very wasteful system of getting people that help we have now. Especially in education. We could probably provide everyone with a stellar education, shiny and wonderful health care and a B.M.W. M5 with what the government collects now, were it not for bureaucratic waste and fraud.
When I was locked up, I was the lead clerk for UNICOR, and I found a ton of ways the place could save money and run more efficiently. Some of those ideas were implemented, but a lot of them couldn't be, because they ran afoul of hardwired rules the system has in place, like having to use GSA approved vendors, allowing vendors who did not have products that 100% fit the needs of the end users bid on contracts (forcing us to use said parts and getting complaints from the undercover F.B.I., D.E.A., A.T.F., Secret Service and D.H.S. guys who needed everything 100% hidden - and this actually led to one death in the field when an undercover was "made" because we had to use a crappy part from one vendor who underbid the vendor who made exactly what we needed). Also, we had to spend x amount of money or lose funding the next year.
The system is hard wired to be wasteful. That's what offends me more than anything.
I'm with you on the approved vendors crap. That's some hard bs to swallow at times.
|
|
It could be easier. Or it could be that those whose tapes had racist(whether perceptual or factual/actual) stuff on them simply didn't come forward with them or put forth more tame versions of their tapes instead. Or that those people who had a problem with politics as usual suddenly came together when a black man was in the office of the presidency. I can be just as conspiracy theorist as this mode of thought too, but unless you can prove that every single individual who attended that event was not racist in any way whatsoever, we're not going to get anywhere.
They've actually been around for a while, they just didn't get any attention until a bunch of Republican former supporters started leaving the party (this was right before the '06 mid-terms) because of disenchantment with Bush. And they didn't really start getting attention until the establishment Republicans realized they were gunning for the "RINOs".
Even though it was just this last summer, people forget that the Tea Party fought hard against Republicans (in the primaries) before they set their sights on Obama. They're just tired of business as usual. Are they the greatest thing since sliced bread? Not really. Are they equally tired of fiscally irresponsible Republicans as they are Democrats? Absolutely. But pointing that out doesn't fit the narrative the media is trying to push.
LOL, you mean the highly unified media narrative...including that coming from Fox? I love how folks imagine so many disparate outlets could be in collusion. Democrats can't even get together to win a vote when they have the majority . What makes you think *their* media can do it? Hmph...I used to think that lefties were conspiracy theorists until the birthers and baggers came along.
M
|
|
LOL, you mean the highly unified media narrative...including that coming from Fox? I love how folks imagine so many disparate outlets could be in collusion. Democrats can't even get together to win a vote when they have the majority . What makes you think *their* media can do it? Hmph...I used to think that lefties were conspiracy theorists until the birthers and baggers came along.
M
If you're talking about cap and trade, you should be thrilled that all of the Democrats (blue dogs) who didn't agree were replaced in the last election. By Republicans.
That would be the only big ticket item on Obama's agenda that didn't make it through.
So now you can have an even more unified Democratic party that is that much more removed from the average American's opinion on a ton of issues. Have fun with that.
As far as the media narrative, the reason Fox buries CNN and MSNBC (combined) in the ratings is they are the only outlet people can go to to not get the same narrative voice as other news networks. and, yeah, they're completely in the other direction than the other two.
If a media company came out that actually was "fair and balanced", it would probably do well. Until one exists (and it doesn't, don't even try), people are just going to go with whomever makes them feel like their right.
This would be why I go overseas for my news, they tend to be a little bit more objective about American politics.
I'm with you on the approved vendors crap. That's some hard bs to swallow at times.True. I'm not objectively against helping people out in need, I just get very bent out of shape when people say we need more money, and refuse to address the very wasteful system of getting people that help we have now. Especially in education. We could probably provide everyone with a stellar education, shiny and wonderful health care and a B.M.W. M5 with what the government collects now, were it not for bureaucratic waste and fraud.
When I was locked up, I was the lead clerk for UNICOR, and I found a ton of ways the place could save money and run more efficiently. Some of those ideas were implemented, but a lot of them couldn't be, because they ran afoul of hardwired rules the system has in place, like having to use GSA approved vendors, allowing vendors who did not have products that 100% fit the needs of the end users bid on contracts (forcing us to use said parts and getting complaints from the undercover F.B.I., D.E.A., A.T.F., Secret Service and D.H.S. guys who needed everything 100% hidden - and this actually led to one death in the field when an undercover was "made" because we had to use a crappy part from one vendor who underbid the vendor who made exactly what we needed). Also, we had to spend x amount of money or lose funding the next year.
The system is hard wired to be wasteful. That's what offends me more than anything.
So you agree that government waste, corruption and inefficiency kills innocent people?
Can we wear matching tin foil hats?
I'm with you on the approved vendors crap. That's some hard bs to swallow at times.True. I'm not objectively against helping people out in need, I just get very bent out of shape when people say we need more money, and refuse to address the very wasteful system of getting people that help we have now. Especially in education. We could probably provide everyone with a stellar education, shiny and wonderful health care and a B.M.W. M5 with what the government collects now, were it not for bureaucratic waste and fraud.
When I was locked up, I was the lead clerk for UNICOR, and I found a ton of ways the place could save money and run more efficiently. Some of those ideas were implemented, but a lot of them couldn't be, because they ran afoul of hardwired rules the system has in place, like having to use GSA approved vendors, allowing vendors who did not have products that 100% fit the needs of the end users bid on contracts (forcing us to use said parts and getting complaints from the undercover F.B.I., D.E.A., A.T.F., Secret Service and D.H.S. guys who needed everything 100% hidden - and this actually led to one death in the field when an undercover was "made" because we had to use a crappy part from one vendor who underbid the vendor who made exactly what we needed). Also, we had to spend x amount of money or lose funding the next year.
The system is hard wired to be wasteful. That's what offends me more than anything.
So you agree that government waste, corruption and inefficiency kills innocent people?
Can we wear matching tin foil hats?
Normally I would, but I have more experience with approved vendors in the private sector, not with government. It's a bad idea no matter who's doing it.
If you're talking about cap and trade, you should be thrilled that all of the Democrats (blue dogs) who didn't agree were replaced in the last election. By Republicans...(more stuff that wasn't relative to my post)
I'm almost positive you didn't actually respond to my post...just said more of what you wanted to say. That's cool, though. I was mainly doing the same thing.
M|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
It could be easier. Or it could be that those whose tapes had racist(whether perceptual or factual/actual) stuff on them simply didn't come forward with them or put forth more tame versions of their tapes instead. Or that those people who had a problem with politics as usual suddenly came together when a black man was in the office of the presidency. I can be just as conspiracy theorist as this mode of thought too, but unless you can prove that every single individual who attended that event was not racist in any way whatsoever, we're not going to get anywhere.
Just wanted to hit on this briefly...
The problem with this theory is two fold. 1) Rep. Lewis (who was initially reported to have heard the slur) had people walking with him with cameras. Surely if he'd heard it (see below) the video/audio would have picked it up.
2) As was initially reported, Rep Lewis heard the slur. He later backed away from that statement. AP credits the comment to Andre Carson (D-IN) and Brenda Jones (Lewis' spokesman).
|
As far as vermin being elected to public office...
It wouldn't be the first time. See the one, in which Kingmaker players were considering appointing their own familiars to the government posts...
"All in favour...? Hmm we have a tie..."
<Neigh!>
"Ah, a 'No' vote from the Right Honourable Lord Equus. Motion overruled!"
As far as vermin being elected to public office...It wouldn't be the first time. See the one, in which Kingmaker players were considering appointing their own familiars to the government posts...
"All in favour...? Hmm we have a tie..."
<Neigh!>
"Ah, a 'No' vote from the Right Honourable Lord Equus. Motion overruled!"
Kae Yoss's comment in that thread nearly made me piss my pants in laughter. I'm not kidding. I'm only a little embarrased to admit it. It kept me chuckling during a long, cold ride to work this morning.
True. I'm not objectively against helping people out in need, I just get very bent out of shape when people say we need more money, and refuse to address the very wasteful system of getting people that help we have now. Especially in education. We could probably provide everyone with a stellar education, shiny and wonderful health care and a B.M.W. M5 with what the government collects now, were it not for bureaucratic waste and fraud.
Its less about fraud and more that bureacracies are inherently wasteful. You cant service millions upon millions of people without a signficant amount of waste. People like to point out the seemingly excessive cost of public education, and they are usually right in terms of numbers. But what they forget is that private schools have the right to refuse to educate certain people, a public school doesnt have and shouldn't have that right. Certain students will cost the system more. Public schools must at least make an effort to educate them, private schools do not.
If every student was reasonably motivated, had a good support structure at home and most of the other things a student needs that arent in the school building, we could most assuredly hand out those BMWs. But that isn't the case. And it isn't possible to have enough intelligent, and caring people in positions that make key choices throughout a system as large as the national public schools system to make reasonable and fair descisions about all those corner case kids that need extra help. So there have to be hard rules made to direct less capable people making the descisions. This creates waste.
For example you have to have a rule saying x brand computers have to be purchased for computer class A, so some overly thrifty superintendant doesnt pick up basement bin stuff that doesnt get the job done. But at the same time, it means tech savy superintendent smarty pants cant pick up those trendy new cheap and objectively good model y computers either. The annoying rules and limitations on people who COULD make better choices are there to keep those who cant or wont from really screwing things up. And they are usually there because someone already did screw up and it caused problems. After a certain amount of time, those restrictions pile up. Waste ensues.
The reality is no system can be both big and efficient. Whether its schools, transportation systems, or health care. And if you try to break them down into smaller systems, you get inequities of service (and i mean equity of opportunity, not equity of result), because it is imposible to impose an equal standard of people doing the job across many small groups. So you have a choice, be big and wasteful, or be small and knowingly allow a portion of your population to recieve a lower standard in essential services.
The reality is no system can be both big and efficient. Whether its schools, transportation systems, or health care.
True, and is does not end at the governments, it applies for companies as well - the bigger they are, the more are they busy with governing themselves. The main difference between the two is that the governments inefficiency is paid from taxes, while for companies, it affects the price of whatever they offer on the market, which is paid by the consumer.
Well, IME, public works may be slower and can cost more. But private systems do imply that some company wants (or needs) to make a profit on whatever it is they do. While this is nothing bad per se, it can lead to strange effects, as almost every company puts making money first on their agenda, providing quality goods second. An example from Germany (again): the Deutsche Bahn (railway) was owned by the state for decades, which made it a slow-changing behemoth for sure. Now, it is a corporation, and while preparing it for going into the stock exchange market, maintenance personnel and infrastructure maintenance was reduced, with the effect that technical difficulties leads to many delays these days, while simultaneously the fares were rising every year for ten years in a row. I think that the primary task of a railway (or any public transportation) is to provide reliable transport for reasonable fares, not increaing some shareholder value. I see this similarly for any other public service, from schools to firefighters to road building to public libraries or whatever: the main focus should be to provide some infrastructure or service, not to make a profit on it.
But I think this a fundamental difference in mentality - from the comments I read on these boards, many US citizens seem to see their governments as a necessary evil, with the emphasis on "evil". In Germany, many citizens see the government as being obliged to provide many public services. Which is better? That depends on what you are used to, I think. I am quite comfortable with knowing that I have a high job security (and quite some payment coming even if I should lose my job), adequate medical insurance (mandatory), probably a decent pension once I reach old age (statutory pension insurance, even if reduced these days). The other side of the coin is that your choice is limited - the unemployment insurance, the medical insurance and the pension insurance are all mandatory, and you are dependent upon whatever "reforms" are made.
The reality is no system can be both big and efficient. Whether its schools, transportation systems, or health care.And this right here is why I favor a private system. I'm of the opinion that the Federal Government has one purpose alone, and that's to protect the nation, not to provide for it. Sure 'some' regulations are useful, and can be applied within the protection framework, but our government is WAY out of control.
And the private system works perfectly in exactly zero cases when it comes to essential services that people need (instead of want). Because the private system is driven by profits, and not by quality. The health care system has categorically proven that private does not work for major public needs. The moment insurance became a for profit industry, costs skyrocketed, and coverage dropped like a brick.
It doesnt work for schools, because a private school and reject a low aptitude student for their own image, and cost efficiency(difficult students cost more to educate then go getters). So in order to ensure all our kids actually got an education instead of just the best students, there would have to be oversight by some group, and the general public has proven time and time again they can't be the watchdogs. They just roll over for private industry. So there would have to be government oversight of this private industry that provides an essential service. Take a look at how well the FDA and SEC works for an examples of why government oversight does not adequately protect the people from private industry practices.
For the things the people HAVE to have, private industry in any combination of government involvment has proven it doesnt work. The government has just proven it costs too much. So our choices are pay through the nose or dont get the service. For me I dont believe it is acceptable to leave American Citizens in the dirt in order to save money.