Romney: We have too many teachers, cops, and firemen. Fire them!

[Halfcentaur]

For starters, we don't need more x is not the same thing as saying we have too many x.

Why exactly do we need more cops? Is there a sudden rise in crime? Why, no, in fact there has been a substantial decrease in violent crime over the last 20 years, off about a third since its peak.

Why do we need more firefighters? Is there a sudden rise in home fires? Nope, in fact there has been a substantial drop in home fires and deaths from home fires; about half as many as there were 30 years ago.

Do we really need more teachers? The number of public school teachers has grown quite substantially over the last 20 years and is projected to continue growing.

Crime or fire rates going down seems kind of beside the point considering many towns are strained with the amount of workers they have today despite the decrease in overall incidents.

 

[Halfcentaur]

Nice. Even the stupidest Libertarians I know do not think privatizing police and fire is a good idea. And kill the teachers? Really? That is the sort of statement I expect to hear from an unreformed Bolshevik, not an American "Skeptic."

Have you see the things teacher do to people? They keep them after school, they make people ask permission to go to the bathroom, they even at times give you work to take home with you.

 

[WildCat]

So who here agrees with the Obama jobs plan to hire police, teachers, and firefighters with federal money?

 

[Peephole]

For starters, we don't need more x is not the same thing as saying we have too many x.

Why exactly do we need more cops? Is there a sudden rise in crime? Why, no, in fact there has been a substantial decrease in violent crime over the last 20 years, off about a third since its peak.

Why do we need more firefighters? Is there a sudden rise in home fires? Nope, in fact there has been a substantial drop in home fires and deaths from home fires; about half as many as there were 30 years ago.

Do we really need more teachers? The number of public school teachers has grown quite substantially over the last 20 years and is projected to continue growing.

Yeah, that's what the US needs, more unemployed!

So who here agrees with the Obama jobs plan to hire police, teachers, and firefighters with federal money?

It's in line with what Krugman is suggesting. If done on a large enough scale, it might actually finally get the US economy out of its depression

 

[Peephole]

Exactly. The very worst thing the federal government should be doing is bailing out irresponsible state governments. What's to constrain them if Uncle Sam has thier back? Maybe the local governments could save the jobs of the teachers, firemen, and cops if they cut some of thier bloated bureaucracy, cronies, and hangers-on. Could probably save them just by firing redundant and overpaid school administrators.

Great idea, states should just fire people so they can hire more people.

Your logic is impenetrable as usual, Wildcat.

 

[WildCat]

It's in line with what Krugman is suggesting. If done on a large enough scale, it might actually finally get the US economy out of its depression

Krugman thinks the federal government should pay for teachers, firefighters, and cops? If so, I couldn't disagree more.

Great idea, states should just fire people so they can hire more people.

Your logic is impenetrable as usual, Wildcat.

The governments responsibility is to serve the public good, not act as an employment agency for political supporters and thier cronies.

Illinois has gobs of redundant and useless agencies, bureaucracies, and other assorted taxing bodies that serve no useful purpose in the modern world. Mostly, these are patronage jobs. They're part of the reason Illinois is in the worst fiscal shape of any US state. Why should taxpayers in North Dakota (or any other state) pay for Illinois government services?

 

[applecorped]

I had red herring for dinner tonight. It was filling.

 

[BenBurch]

So who here agrees with the Obama jobs plan to hire police, teachers, and firefighters with federal money?

I agree with hiring police, teachers and firefighters with federal money.

Absolutely I do.

The places where these are most needed are the same places that cannot afford to pay for them. If they are forced to be on their own resources, collapse of services follows and the crime so engendered spills out to surrounding communities and across state lines. And there is one aspect of why this is a federal domain issue.

Take the interstate highway system, which you agree is a federal domain.

Say we have a state where large areas are in civil collapse, and an interstate highway goes through one of those areas. How expensive is it going to be for the federal marshals to keep order on those sections of road? I think it would be a LOT more than preventing the problem in the first place. If in fact they CAN maintain order.

Look at the Mexican border regions if you want an example of the sort of national security threat such regions could represent.

 

[Peephole]

Krugman thinks the federal government should pay for teachers, firefighters, and cops? If so, I couldn't disagree more.


The governments responsibility is to serve the public good, not act as an employment agency for political supporters and thier cronies.

Illinois has gobs of redundant and useless agencies, bureaucracies, and other assorted taxing bodies that serve no useful purpose in the modern world. Mostly, these are patronage jobs. They're part of the reason Illinois is in the worst fiscal shape of any US state. Why should taxpayers in North Dakota (or any other state) pay for Illinois government services?

Because a) that's what happens in normal countries, you pay for eachothers stuff and b) the US economy is in the ******* and desperately needs spending.

 

[ngc6205]

Even in context.

No.

Stating that total government spending needs to be cut back DOES NOT equate to cutting in a particular area. Spending can be remain level (or even increase slightly) in some areas while total government gets reduced.

 

[Twiggett]

"Mitt Romney rebutted President Obama’s call for aid to state and local government to prevent layoffs of public employees by bluntly insisting that government payrolls needed to shrink, even if it meant fewer firefighters or teachers."

Ok, I don't quite get this. Does he not want to get elected? Right or wrong (I lean towards wrong) someone in his campaign had to know that this kind of statement isn't going to be well received and would make for a wonderful sound bite for a campaign ad for Obama.......

 

[Magyar]

Not one penny of federal money should go to those hires.

Everytime I read comments like this my first reaction is to inform the poster that the
Civil War IS over.

But outside of this almost psychotic insistence that we're not a single nation but a collection of states, in all seriousness I want to ask this question (yet again - because just like trying to get a cogent answer about what rights you lose if you get socialized medicine or marriage for gay people)

What is the magical formula for states rights Why not county or city. I mean I live in the suburbs where we have high quality homes and low crime. But in the city they have slums and high crime rates and I am SICK and TIRED of spending my hard earned money paying taxes to save the homes of all those (well you insert you favorite pejorative)

My city has NO business spending a penny for THOSE hires.

 

[applecorped]

Everytime I read comments like this my first reaction is to inform the poster that the
Civil War IS over.

But outside of this almost psychotic insistence that we're not a single nation but a collection of states, in all seriousness I want to ask this question (yet again - because just like trying to get a cogent answer about what rights you lose if you get socialized medicine or marriage for gay people)

What is the magical formula for states rights Why not county or city. I mean I live in the suburbs where we have high quality homes and low crime. But in the city they have slums and high crime rates and I am SICK and TIRED of spending my hard earned money paying taxes to save the homes of all those (well you insert you favorite pejorative)

My city has NO business spending a penny for THOSE hires.

The Libs will rise again!



(but not anytime soon)

 

[BenBurch]

No.

Stating that total government spending needs to be cut back DOES NOT equate to cutting in a particular area. Spending can be remain level (or even increase slightly) in some areas while total government gets reduced.

And he singled out first responders and educators. Sorry, you lose.

 

[WildCat]

Everytime I read comments like this my first reaction is to inform the poster that the
Civil War IS over.

But outside of this almost psychotic insistence that we're not a single nation but a collection of states, in all seriousness I want to ask this question (yet again - because just like trying to get a cogent answer about what rights you lose if you get socialized medicine or marriage for gay people)

What is the magical formula for states rights Why not county or city. I mean I live in the suburbs where we have high quality homes and low crime. But in the city they have slums and high crime rates and I am SICK and TIRED of spending my hard earned money paying taxes to save the homes of all those (well you insert you favorite pejorative)

My city has NO business spending a penny for THOSE hires.

This has nothing at all to do with any of those things you talk about. This is about the role and responsibilities of the federal government and of state and local governments.

My state is a mess, the worst of the worst, and I think it would be a horrible idea for the federal government to reward us for our failure. Because all of Illinois' problems were caused by Illinois.

 

[ngc6205]

And he singled out first responders and educators. Sorry, you lose.

I disagree and you don't have to get snarky about it. Let's look at the first sentence of his actual statement which was left out of the OP. "He [Obama] wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers,..." Romney is simply restating the current party line of smaller government and less overall spending in response to what Obama allegedly said about increasing government.

Personally, I don't like either of them. I haven't really liked any Presidential candidate in many years. However, I don't jump on any statement made by a Presidential contender without closely examining the context simply because he supposedly doesn't lean my way. Do you?

 

[Unabogie]

You're really going to defend block grants, the holy grail of pork?



Do you know what "interstate" means? And the national interest in a modern highway system?

Now, what is the national interest in Uncle Sam paying for Peoria's cops, firefighters, and teachers?

Well you're the one who started in on "since when do we do this?" and the answer is for your entire lifetime. Then you move the goal posts and assert that block grants are pork, which doesn't have anything to do with your original question, which was when did we start doing this.

And let's move on to your second point:

Do you know what "interstate" means? And the national interest in a modern highway system?

Well duh, that's the whole point. We also have a national interest in our kids going to school and our cities not being overrun by crime and our forests getting routine care so they don't turn into wild fires.

That's in all of our interests, just as much as good roads are. But again, this isn't new. The highway bill passed in 1956, so unless you are seriously old, you've never lived in a country that didn't provide federal dollars to prop up state functions. It just hasn't existed in your living memory. And strangely enough, this was never a controversy until the Teabaggers came around and decided that STATES=GOOD and FEDS=BAD. Which is frankly moronic.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Ok, I don't quite get this. Does he not want to get elected?

Hey, when you're Richie Rich, you bore easily. Running for pres is a way to occupy some time and hand out buttons with your name on them that people want to wear. Also fun: seeing what it's like to ride in one of those big buses!

 

[applecorped]

make for a wonderful sound bite for a campaign ad for Obama.......

Hope and change........2.0.




More hope. Less change.

 

[DavidJames]

I disagree and you don't have to get snarky about it. Let's look at the first sentence of his actual statement which was left out of the OP. "He [Obama] wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers,..." Romney is simply restating the current party line of smaller government and less overall spending in response to what Obama allegedly said about increasing government.

His statement is 100% clear to anyone who cares to listen.