And full of waste and fraud which is my point. Did you read recently about the coffee mugs for the military that were $1000's? Have you watched road construction lately?
You've got to up your game today, you're to easy.
So, who's going to follow the election results tonight?
- Thread starter NoleSoup4U
- Start date
You've got to up your game today, you're to easy.
Look at one of the most socialist states in the nation, California. Their infrastructure is so bad that they've been asking D.C. to pay for it. They have like the sixth highest GDP in the world, and they can't even fix their own roads.
Most of the waste in the military budget comes from bloated private contracts.
Those cups were being bought from a private contractor. That says more about the problem of lobbying than it does about government efficiency.
too*
Our infrastructure is falling apart because libertarian types keep trying to cut the funding for repairing it.
There's also the tug of war between the two parties because they both want to be responsible for the benefits of rebuilding our infrastructure without having to be held responsible for the costs.
California is one of a few states that provides far more tax revenue to the federal government than it gets back. Kinda funny how the "socialist" states tend to pull their weight far more than the deep red states that provide far less in revenue than they get back from the federal government...
They're lobbying politicians who award them contracts after they get elected.
You're trying to reduce this to a single variable analysis which is a ridiculous oversimplification. Do you believe that all governments are exactly the same all of the time? The need to eliminate private funding of campaigns doesn't prove that government isn't ever efficient. It simply proves that we need to tweak our government so that it can be more efficient end less corrupt.
This is a perfect example of what I was talking about in the other thread. Conservatives oppose public funding of elections, then complain that privately funded elections produce corruption, and blame it on "government."
I've seen that argument debunked so many times. That argument doesn't take into account people moving and picking up SS checks in a different state, like Arizona.
It means that people make their money and pay their taxes in one state, then retire, move, and collect money in another state. You act like people never move or something.
This is federal money you’re talking about. Your SS is the same no matter what state you live in. Same is true about the money you pay in. What state you live in makes no difference.
WUT?
If you pay it in one state and then collect it in another state, you don't think that affects your little study?
As per the study at hand, this article shows that California gets back over ninety-five cents on the dollar. I'm guess that, along with the SS numbers, they're probably getting back over a dollar on their dollar.
https://www.theatlantic.com/busines...tates-are-givers-and-which-are-takers/361668/
I like the new guy.
What’s the O/U on how long it takes for him to drop the attempt to reason with them and turn into a jaded smartass like the rest of us?
What’s the O/U on how long it takes for him to drop the attempt to reason with them and turn into a jaded smartass like the rest of us?
He makes too much sense. He'll be called every name in the book soon because, well just because.
Who’s calling people names? I’m trying to be charitable with you, but you’re not really providing much incentive to do so...
The guy makes sense simple as that but if history holds true soon he will be called all kinds of names and be called stupid etc. clear enough?
Called stupid by who?
I never said it wasn’t clear. Seems like you’re the only person that’s keen on insulting people...
Eh, it wouldn't be the first time. I was called every name under the sun over on HROT. My posts were constantly distorted and words were put in my mouth. It just kind of goes with the territory.
You don’t seem to have much of a problem with distorting other’s posts and putting words in people’s mouths. Certainly doesn’t stop you from calling people “socialists.” I guess you’re right, it does go with the territory.
Well, when you support Bernie Sanders, you're going to get called a socialist. You may not be a full-blown socialist, but you have some real socialist tendencies, such as your belief in a government-run healthcare system.
Lol you definitely need to lay off the Fox News. Supporting a mixed economy isn't socialism. Bernie Sanders isn't trying to seize the means and modes of production. He's a European style social democrat.
Are you trying to tell me that a government run healthcare system isn't socialism?
In the context of an almost entirely market based economy with private ownership of capital? No, its not socialism. Is the government building roads socialism?
Single payer healthcare wouldn't even eliminate the market side of healthcare. There would still be private companies operating within that industry. So clearly it is not socialism. Unless you're one of those people that thinks its "socialism" anytime the government does something.
Yes, the government building roads is socialism. And of course, a single payer system will eliminate the market side. When you place restrictions on how much doctors can charge, then you've eliminated the market.
Lolololololol
People can still go to private practitioners if they want. It doesn’t ban the market.
Companies will still be providing products and services to the market, except consumers pay through taxes instead of exorbitant bills. You don’t know what a market is, and you don’t know what socialism is. The government building roads is not socialism. That’s just silly.
Public goods are a part of market based economies. And they aren’t provided in efficient quantities by private firms because external benefits can’t be captured by the supplier. That’s day 1 of Econ 101.
Oh, I get it. So, you just want to put the private market at a disadvantage and force them to accept public policies in order to survive. You don't even know what a free market is. A free market is a place where people go to exchange compensation for services rendered, without the government sticking their nose in, except for the obvious job it has to prosecute fraud.
Yeahhhh I’m getting bored here. I’m an economics student that’s going to be getting a PhD in the subject. It’s a pretty safe bet that I don’t need a lesson in markets from you.
There’s no such thing as a “free market” btw.
I didn't say there was a free market. However, as a doctorate in economics, you should realize that government interference into a market is hardly capitalism, and is at least corporatism if not straight up socialism. Even corporatism is socialism though, just a smaller version of it.
I remember Natural, but I don't remember that gif. I'm not saying that I didn't post it, just that I don't remember. I was pretty drunk at times back then.
If I went into one of my Econ classes talking about “government interference not being capitalism” then I would get laughed out of the room. Economists don’t base their studies on libertarian idealism.
Corporatism is a completely different thing. Government regulation is absolutely necessary for preserving the integrity of markets. Taxes, subsidies, consumer protection, environmental standards... You don’t want to live in a world where these things don’t exist. That’s not the same thing as writing policies to protect monopolies or subsidize corporations that shouldnt get them.
Unless the government is seizing capital to control the means and modes of production then it’s not socialism. Regulation is not socialism, nor is it corporatism unless it’s to disproportionally serve corporations. That’s a proposterous argument.
I've already stated that the government should be there to prevent fraud. That doesn't mean that a state-run health care system isn't socialism.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
THI Podcast: The Basketball Show | GM Role, Extended Staff, Family and More
- Latest: andrew jones
-
-
-