Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

The US Government Shut-Down - Whom to Blame

Page 11 of 23 [ 361 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ... 23  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

RushKing
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,340
Location: Minnesota, United States

03 Oct 2013, 11:18 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
RushKing wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
RushKing wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Cyanide wrote:
The only one to blame for this is the state... for existing...


I suspect you'd miss the state terribly once it's gone. Who is going to protect you from foreign invasion? Or build freeways that actually go somewhere? Or keeps industry from adding weight to products with broken glass, or won't wash off animal feces from meat?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

The people

http://abcnews.go.com/US/pothole-robin- ... d8kpfUo4dU


I kinda prefer a professional army defending us, as they have the best high tech weapons and training.
As for roads and infrastructure - I much prefer paying workers to do that, in order to keep people employed, as well as having all the needed machinery and materials available to them.
And health inspectors? Lots of luck getting inspectors into plants where animals are slaughtered for food without the force of law to back them up. And I'd prefer to have trained inspectors who know what it is they're looking for.
There are just things not everyone has the expertize or even the time to do. That's why we have government trained employees to do these things.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

The self managed construction firms would still have the same machinery they had beforehand. They don't need the state to figure out how to obtain new equipment. Self managed firms tend to do a better job at regulating themselves, because personal responsibility is much more pronounced in institutions where people have more autonomy. In a private property, someone who is packaging meat with feces on it may think I'm not doing wrong, I'm just taking orders from the top down.


But why would private firms build roads and infrastructure? Who's going to hire them? Who's going to make contracts with them? You need a government for that. Otherwise, a construction company would be doing it out of the goodness of their hearts without any payday at the end. Workers are going to want to be paid, and investors certainly don't want to see their investments go down the toilet.
As for your point regarding the feces drenched meat in unregulated private meat packaging companies - I think you just made my argument for me, which is why we need government regulations.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

You don't understand my position. I wish the state to be abolished because I am not in favor of private firms. Private enterprises are tyrannical and anti democratic, and the states role is to protect them from expropriation.

Here is a Wikipedia article on workers' self management:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%2 ... management



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,632
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

04 Oct 2013, 12:50 am

RushKing -
Okay, sorry for misunderstanding you. I did skim that Wiki article, and found mention of my Granddaddy's old union, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW or Wobblies), who were of the syndicalist economic persuasion. 8)

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,632
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

04 Oct 2013, 12:54 am

Dox47 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
People on public assistance don't buy big screen TV's, or game consoles -
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I'm not one to make that argument, as I support social safety net programs, but there is some truth in that. I used to see it firsthand when I worked retail in the White Center neighborhood in Seattle; the first of the month would come, and suddenly I'd have a huge rush of people buying video games that were not at all shy about where the money came from. My very first girlfriend's family were also sort of the arch example, her father was a crack addict that had managed to hang onto his journeyman status with the local labor temple, so he'd get these jobs sweeping the floors in at construction zones at $20 with tons of overtime, but yet still was in section 8 housing and also received all sorts of subsidies for single fathers and such. That was nasty, my GF's little brother would have new shoes every week and every video game he wanted because his dad would just hand him cash, but there was never any food in the house and half the time the heat or the power or both would be out. Giving people money doesn't magically make them responsible, and I think that's the point a lot of people are making when they object to welfare programs.


I agree it's truly terrible when some people on assistance see only dollar signs and neglect their parental role. But the unfair argument by conservatives goes that everyone needing the social safety net are guilty of such things, and this simply is not true. Despite what the right's stereotype of the poor might say, there are plenty of decent parents who are just down on their luck.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,583
Location: the island of defective toy santas

04 Oct 2013, 12:57 am

part of the TP antipathy towards those down on their luck may well stem from a personal fear that it could just happen to them also, the ever present fear of loss. I can't remember what the shrinks call that type of transference or whatever it's called. but the unlucky are a living reminder of the fundamental unfairness of fate.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

04 Oct 2013, 12:58 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
I agree it's truly terrible when some people on assistance see only dollar signs and neglect their parental role. But the unfair argument by conservatives goes that everyone needing the social safety net are guilty of such things, and this simply is not true. Despite what the right's stereotype of the poor might say, there are plenty of decent parents who are just down on their luck.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Oh, I know that, I'm just pointing out that like many such things there is a nugget of truth to it, that it's not totally pulled out of someone's ass.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,632
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

04 Oct 2013, 1:14 am

Dox47 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I agree it's truly terrible when some people on assistance see only dollar signs and neglect their parental role. But the unfair argument by conservatives goes that everyone needing the social safety net are guilty of such things, and this simply is not true. Despite what the right's stereotype of the poor might say, there are plenty of decent parents who are just down on their luck.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Oh, I know that, I'm just pointing out that like many such things there is a nugget of truth to it, that it's not totally pulled out of someone's ass.


Oh, but Newt Gingrich pulls a lot of stinky things out of his fat ass.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

04 Oct 2013, 1:58 am

RushKing wrote:
The self managed construction firms would still have the same machinery they had beforehand. They don't need the state to figure out how to obtain new equipment. Self managed firms tend to do a better job at regulating themselves, because personal responsibility is much more pronounced in institutions where people have more autonomy. In a private property, someone who is packaging meat with feces on it may think I'm not doing wrong, I'm just taking orders from the top down.

The question is, though, responsibility for what? For private firms, the answer is usually responsibility for the bottom line: for maximum profit. That's why an earthquake in Haiti killed hundreds of thousands of people, and a similar-sized earthquake in Chile the same year killed hardly any by comparison. There was no enforcement of an already lax building code in Haiti, so the cement companies and building companies put up unreinforced concrete consisting mostly of sand. Sand is cheap; rebar and good cement are not.

Even worse, it's not just about the bottom line; it's about the bottom line this quarter. Very few private firms and venture capitalists are willing to fund projects whose payout might be a decade or more away, even if the profit would be huge.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

04 Oct 2013, 1:08 pm

LKL wrote:
RushKing wrote:
The self managed construction firms would still have the same machinery they had beforehand. They don't need the state to figure out how to obtain new equipment. Self managed firms tend to do a better job at regulating themselves, because personal responsibility is much more pronounced in institutions where people have more autonomy. In a private property, someone who is packaging meat with feces on it may think I'm not doing wrong, I'm just taking orders from the top down.

The question is, though, responsibility for what? For private firms, the answer is usually responsibility for the bottom line: for maximum profit. That's why an earthquake in Haiti killed hundreds of thousands of people, and a similar-sized earthquake in Chile the same year killed hardly any by comparison. There was no enforcement of an already lax building code in Haiti, so the cement companies and building companies put up unreinforced concrete consisting mostly of sand. Sand is cheap; rebar and good cement are not.
Are you really saying that the people in Haiti who were living in what was little more than mud houses with minimal or no internal structures paid outside companies to build those houses for them? They must have more money than I thought.



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

04 Oct 2013, 2:03 pm

It wasn't just 'mud huts' (cinderblocks mostly, IIrc); that fell down; thousands of people died when government buildings and other multi-story concrete buildings collapsed like stacks of pancakes. Haiti is second- or third-world, not some hunter-gatherer society.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03069.html
http://cementtrust.wordpress.com/2013/0 ... st-report/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8460042.stm



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

07 Oct 2013, 8:08 am

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cuYc9HqiK4[/youtube]



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

07 Oct 2013, 8:56 am

ArrantPariah wrote:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cuYc9HqiK4[/youtube]


So far the House of Representatives have done nothing illegal. What treason?



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

07 Oct 2013, 9:19 am

The president doesn't make legislation, the Senate doesn't originate revenue generating bills, this is the House's duty alone as marked out in Article 1 Section 7 of the US Constitution. The House represents the will of the people. Not only is the House right to stand up to executive tyranny and the overstepping of the Senate over this government shutdown, Obamacare is unconstitutional. If the individual mandate is not a valid exercise of the commerce clause and a tax as they say it is then it did not originate in the House and the law is void.

Harry Reid and Barack Obama refuse to negotiate, they're spending more money to "shutdown" non-essential parts of government than it costs to run them normally while . They're punishing the American people, what is the point of shutting down open air monuments, parks, even the sections of the ocean, its a joke. Obama is not king, he does not rule by decree much to his disappointment.



Schneekugel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jul 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,612

07 Oct 2013, 9:24 am

visagrunt wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
I imagine now the CIA and NSA are unable to work. Al Qaeda will be sending a thank you note to the Republicans.


I think you'll find that large components of those agencies are deemed essential.


Essential are things that you share with every other human in the world. Medicine is something all people around the world need from now and then. Food is such a thing. Getting the education to become a part of the society you live in. Having a social area caring for you, be it family or friends or whatever. Shelter from extreme weather... All of these are things, that people all around the world will agree to have a need for it. While when it comes to CIA and NSA, I am not exactly sure if Inuit would agree with you that the CIA was essential for them. ^^



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

07 Oct 2013, 9:44 am

Jacoby wrote:
The House represents the will of the people.

The Repugnican majority in the House of Representatives is the result of extremely partisan gerrymandering, and frustrated the will of the people.

http://www.emmetcounty.org/pzcr/

Jacoby wrote:
Not only is the House right to stand up to executive tyranny


"Executive Tyranny?" :lmao:

Jacoby wrote:
Obamacare is unconstitutional.


Oh, and you know more about constitutional law than the Supreme Court? :lmao:

Jacoby wrote:
If the individual mandate is not a valid exercise of the commerce clause and a tax as they say it is then it did not originate in the House and the law is void.


Stop reading those silly Libertarian tracks already.

Jacoby wrote:
Harry Reid and Barack Obama refuse to negotiate,

There ain't nuthin' to negotiate. Obamacare is a done deal, and is rolling out on schedule.

Jacoby wrote:
they're spending more money to "shutdown" non-essential parts of government than it costs to run them normally while .


So, the Repugs aren't gaining anything then, are they?

Jacoby wrote:
They're punishing the American people, what is the point of shutting down open air monuments, parks, even the sections of the ocean, its a joke.


Aw, boo-hoo.

Jacoby wrote:
Obama is not king,


No, he is President.

Jacoby wrote:
he does not rule by decree much to his disappointment.


We are counting on the President to stand firm for a change.



ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 120
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

07 Oct 2013, 9:46 am

ruveyn wrote:
So far the House of Representatives have done nothing illegal. What treason?


The Repugs are betraying the country.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

07 Oct 2013, 9:51 am

ArrantPariah wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
The House represents the will of the people.

The Repugnican majority in the House of Representatives is the result of extremely partisan gerrymandering, and frustrated the will of the people.

http://www.emmetcounty.org/pzcr/

Jacoby wrote:
Not only is the House right to stand up to executive tyranny


"Executive Tyranny?" :lmao:

Jacoby wrote:
Obamacare is unconstitutional.


Oh, and you know more about constitutional law than the Supreme Court? :lmao:

Jacoby wrote:
If the individual mandate is not a valid exercise of the commerce clause and a tax as they say it is then it did not originate in the House and the law is void.


Stop reading those silly Libertarian tracks already.

Jacoby wrote:
Harry Reid and Barack Obama refuse to negotiate,

There ain't nuthin' to negotiate. Obamacare is a done deal, and is rolling out on schedule.

Jacoby wrote:
they're spending more money to "shutdown" non-essential parts of government than it costs to run them normally while .


So, the Repugs aren't gaining anything then, are they?

Jacoby wrote:
They're punishing the American people, what is the point of shutting down open air monuments, parks, even the sections of the ocean, its a joke.


Aw, boo-hoo.

Jacoby wrote:
Obama is not king,


No, he is President.

Jacoby wrote:
he does not rule by decree much to his disappointment.


We are counting on the President to stand firm for a change.


There is no point talking to you, don't respond to me any longer.