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

Brown said:
I'm not the first one to say this, but it strikes me as a wee bit ironic that someone who has such loathing for government wants very, very, VERY badly to get a job in government.

And the really stupid part of the whole bit is that most people who work for the state or federal bodies aren't government. My mom taught poor kids to read as a public school teacher. My dad helped handicapped people find jobs, get off the dole and earn some respect. The private sector wouldn't do this, there was no damn profit in it for them, but my parents did it, and the friendly neighborhood taxpayer paid their salaries. But goddamn it, my parents weren't "the government." Shoot, I worked for the State as a tutor and a teaching assistant, and I wasn't "the government" either.
Click to expand...
I hilited the key word.

Those jobs weren't because of a federal jobs program, right?
 
Brown said:
I'm not the first one to say this, but it strikes me as a wee bit ironic that someone who has such loathing for government wants very, very, VERY badly to get a job in government.1
And the really stupid part of the whole bit is that most people who work for the state or federal bodies aren't government. My mom taught poor kids to read as a public school teacher. My dad helped handicapped people find jobs, get off the dole and earn some respect. The private sector wouldn't do this2, there was no damn profit in it for them, but my parents did it, and the friendly neighborhood taxpayer paid their salaries. But goddamn it, my parents weren't "the government." Shoot, I worked for the State as a tutor and a teaching assistant, and I wasn't "the government" either.3
Click to expand...
1. It's not "loathing of government" to want government to reduce its economic footprint. Someone has to manage the cutbacks.
2. I recommend James Tooley's The Beautiful Tree and E. G. West, Education and the State. Schools and on-the-job training would exist without compulsory attendance laws and tax subsidies.
3. The people you describe were government employees.
 
Ziggurat said:
Roads, Ben? That's the extent of the state's spending? Roads?

Transportation expenses are less than 10% of California's budget, Ben. You have failed to answer my question. What are the needs of the state? Giving me one need, and a small need at that, doesn't actually answer that question.
Click to expand...

Establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general welfare, securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. That sort of thing.

In contrast, the spirit of the Conservative movement seems to be "**** you, me and my cronies will take what we want, get your own."
 
Last edited:
WildCat said:
I hilited the key word.

Those jobs weren't because of a federal jobs program, right?
Click to expand...
First of all, I just want to say that I read the opening post and submitted this reply, without seeing any discussion that came afterward.

Actually, some of the work my parents and I did was related to federal funding and federal programs, yes, but they were not part of a jobs program per se. My mom worked for the State, true, but her reading programs were part of implementing federal education programs authorized by the Congress. My dad worked for the State, but he particpated in federal programs and reviewed federal grants, and his work helped in a small way to bring about the Americans with Disabilities Act.

I take no stand at this time on whether the federal government ought to act to spur jobs that, by some standards, ought to be local (state, county, city or regional).
 
Piscivore said:
Establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general welfare, securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. That sort of thing.
Click to expand...

Is this as specific as you can get? Because as far as I can tell, you've simply taken the problem of not having a shared meaning for one word and turned it into a problem of not having a shared definition for several words.

In contrast, the spirit of the Conservative movement seems to be "**** you, me and my cronies will take what we want, get your own."
Click to expand...

Ah yes, the old "you're a meanie!" argument. I guess I have to concede now. :rolleyes:
 
Brown said:
First of all, I just want to say that I read the opening post and submitted this reply, without seeing any discussion that came afterward.

Actually, some of the work my parents and I did was related to federal funding and federal programs, yes, but they were not part of a jobs program per se. My mom worked for the State, true, but her reading programs were part of implementing federal education programs authorized by the Congress. My dad worked for the State, but he particpated in federal programs and reviewed federal grants, and his work helped in a small way to bring about the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Click to expand...
Well there you go, it was part of federal program to get local schools to do things the feds way.

The difference here is this is being billed as a jobs program. And these jobs are presumably permanent ones, what happens if the federal spigot stops? Does the fed pay their salaries for one year? 2? 20? Forever (once these things get started they develop an inertia that's hard to stop)?

Brown said:
I take no stand at this time on whether the federal government ought to act to spur jobs that, by some standards, ought to be local (state, county, city or regional).
Click to expand...
Then I have no use for you! :p
 
WildCat said:
"According to me"? :confused:
Click to expand...

Yes:
WildCat said:
Make no mistake about it, Illinois and California are in the shape they're in not because of economic conditions out of their control but because of a bloated and corrupt government (Illinois) and a populace that has the power to vote down every proposed tax increase, and does (California) while demanding ever more government services.
Click to expand...

WildCat said:
The people of California vote, and they vote for no tax increases time and time again. How are they not responsible for their own predicament?
Click to expand...

WildCat said:
Illinois isn't poor, we are just very corrupt and wildly inefficioent. We have several times the number of government taxing bodies than California does, despite being just 1/4 the size.
Click to expand...
So yes, "according to you".


elbe said:
Only Illinois.
Click to expand...
And California. I'll add Arizona being bat-crap crazy to the list.
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
Is this as specific as you can get? Because as far as I can tell, you've simply taken the problem of not having a shared meaning for one word and turned it into a problem of not having a shared definition for several words.
Click to expand...
Fine, you need specifics? The FBI, the federal court system, the FTC, the FDA, the US Military, National Health care, National parks, museums, libraries, and public art, creating a fully educated citizenry (not just job-trained, but educated), creating and enforcing laws protecting minorities regardless of the prejudices at the local level. That sort of thing.

Ah yes, the old "you're a meanie!" argument.
Click to expand...
If you say so.
 
Ziggurat said:
Roads, Ben? That's the extent of the state's spending? Roads?

Transportation expenses are less than 10% of California's budget, Ben. You have failed to answer my question. What are the needs of the state? Giving me one need, and a small need at that, doesn't actually answer that question.
Click to expand...

Police
Prisons
Fire (including wildfires)
Forestry (to suppress conditions that cause wildfires)
Coroners
National Guard (that's the Militia for you knuckle-draggers)
Watershed management
Water distribution (All tied up with Rights out west)
Sewage management (unless you like having **** washing up on all the beaches and destroying tourism.)
Ports

Just a few NEEDS of the State.

There are many more.

You can move to Somalia if you want to SLIME out of paying for everything, but that is what I see the GOP position as, sliming out of paying for present advantage no matter what that means in the future.
 
Piscivore said:
Establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, providing for the common defense, promoting the general welfare, securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. That sort of thing.

In contrast, the spirit of the Conservative movement seems to be "**** you, me and my cronies will take what we want, get your own."
Click to expand...

Hear, hear! Well said, sir!
 
BenBurch said:
Police
Prisons
Fire (including wildfires)
Forestry (to suppress conditions that cause wildfires)
Coroners
National Guard (that's the Militia for you knuckle-draggers)
Watershed management
Water distribution (All tied up with Rights out west)
Sewage management (unless you like having **** washing up on all the beaches and destroying tourism.)
Ports

Just a few NEEDS of the State.
Click to expand...
And these aren't just "California" needs, or "Illinois" needs; they are American needs. If we are going to have a country at all, we can't have one in which 1/50th of it is prosperous and another 1/50 poor. One part of it recognizing the rights of minorities and another at the mercy of homophobes and racists. One region educated and one mired in superstition and ignorance.

This was all hashed out 150 years or so ago, I thought. I guess "doomed to repeat it" is true.
 
Piscivore said:
And these aren't just "California" needs, or "Illinois" needs; they are American needs. If we are going to have a country at all, we can't have one in which 1/50th of it is prosperous and another 1/50 poor. One part of it recognizing the rights of minorities and another at the mercy of homophobes and racists. One region educated and one mired in superstition and ignorance.

This was all hashed out 150 years or so ago, I thought. I guess "doomed to repeat it" is true.
Click to expand...

They want to kill the USA and go through the pockets of the corpse to enrich themselves. They imagine they will come out of it fine. I know that Marie Antoinette thought herself invulnerable. The stupidest thing is that most of the people arguing hard for this aren't going to see a dime of that spoil, but they seem to be blissfully unaware of the **** sandwich their ideological masters will feed them once they succeed.
 
Piscivore said:
Yes:





So yes, "according to you".
Click to expand...
So "Illinois is corrupt" morphs into "the States are corrupt and incompetent"?

So no, except in your house of straw. But if straw is all you have, build a strawman so they say...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom