Has Anyone Else Completely Lost Faith In The Government?

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

The only thing I will say is that, I never had faith in our government. America has been going in the toilet for a while now, and people are just starting to notice.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

The only thing I will say is that, I never had faith in our government. America has been going in the toilet for a while now, and people are just starting to notice.

Yeah, a good example of "why" is the Redskins name debate.

Society is focused on a name, not the real issues of native americans. Its tragic. You think a big of rich liberal men give a shit about the poverty rate and substance abuse of that community?

Focusing on the heavy lifting isnt for this/our generation, too soft.

[Avinash_Tyagi]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Yeah, a good example of "why" is the Redskins name debate.

Society is focused on a name, not the real issues of native americans. Its tragic. You think a big of rich liberal men give a shit about the poverty rate and substance abuse of that community?

Focusing on the heavy lifting isnt for this/our generation, too soft.

If conservatives were really concerned about the poverty rate and substance abuse and other issues plaguing a lot of communities (not just native americans), they wouldn't be all about preventing the creation of high paying jobs with infrastructure programs, cutting social programs which benefit the poor, preventing the raising of the minimum wage and preventing steps to reduce the cost of higher education.

Education, higher wage paying jobs and beneficial social programs would solve all those issues (infrastructure would bring back middle class jobs that don't require a college degree, and reducing the cost of education would make it easier for the younger generation in these groups to get higher education).

But conservatives aren't actually about solving issues, they just like the wedge politics these issues create.


Also before you argue that Minimum wage will kill jobs, empirical evidence from studies of increased minimum wages shows that minimum wage increases are not job killers, in fact the people lifted out of poverty turn around and spend the extra money leading to more economic activity and more jobs, due to the extra demand.

And before you argue that we don't have the money, the spending on infrastructure will result in a stronger economy, with more higher wage jobs, especially from the infrastructure spending and more people with higher education, meaning more tax revenue, which will in fact make it easier to close the deficit and even generate a surplus. Plus as more people have high paying jobs, the burden on social programs will drop allowing the government to reduce spending in those areas without leaving people high and dry.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Avinash_Tyagi

If conservatives were really concerned about the poverty rate and substance abuse and other issues plaguing a lot of communities (not just native americans), they wouldn't be all about preventing the creation of high paying jobs with infrastructure programs, cutting social programs which benefit the poor, preventing the raising of the minimum wage and preventing steps to reduce the cost of higher education.

Education, higher wage paying jobs and beneficial social programs would solve all those issues (infrastructure would bring back middle class jobs that don't require a college degree, and reducing the cost of education would make it easier for the younger generation in these groups to get higher education).

But conservatives aren't actually about solving issues, they just like the wedge politics these issues create.


Also before you argue that Minimum wage will kill jobs, empirical evidence from studies of increased minimum wages shows that minimum wage increases are not job killers, in fact the people lifted out of poverty turn around and spend the extra money leading to more economic activity and more jobs, due to the extra demand.

And before you argue that we don't have the money, the spending on infrastructure will result in a stronger economy, with more higher wage jobs, especially from the infrastructure spending and more people with higher education, meaning more tax revenue, which will in fact make it easier to close the deficit and even generate a surplus. Plus as more people have high paying jobs, the burden on social programs will drop allowing the government to reduce spending in those areas without leaving people high and dry.

im for a raise in mininum wage to a certain extent and a rise in educational spending. Infrastructure spending is notorious pork-infested, so im not for that as much.

But your right about high paying jobs, thats where your god-like president has failed miserably...i mean terribly. buck stops with him right? Why hasnt he been able to create high paying jobs?

[Avinash_Tyagi]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

im for a raise in mininum wage to a certain extent and a rise in educational spending. Infrastructure spending is notorious pork-infested, so im not for that as much.

But your right about high paying jobs, thats where your god-like president has failed miserably...i mean terribly. buck stops with him right? Why hasnt he been able to create high paying jobs?

Even pork projects create jobs, however if you're truly worried about pork there could be a board of people from public and private sector as well as engineers/architects/city planners/etc. to decide how the money is distributed.

Also You can argue that the buck stops with the President, but that's not how our political system works.

the Congress must pass laws and bills, the President can only execute laws (he has limited executive action powers, but that is not anything like a law or bill).

Until congress actually decides to play ball on the issues he can do little.

Remember this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyeJ55o3El0

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Avinash_Tyagi

Even pork projects create jobs, however if you're truly worried about pork there could be a board of people from public and private sector as well as engineers/architects/city planners/etc. to decide how the money is distributed.

Also You can argue that the buck stops with the President, but that's not how our political system works.

the Congress must pass laws and bills, the President can only execute laws (he has limited executive action powers, but that is not anything like a law or bill).

Until congress actually decides to play ball on the issues he can do little.

Remember this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyeJ55o3El0

You keep making excuses like the rest. Im not a conservative or liberal, just someone who is willing to be honest and look at things objectively. You keep in step with the party.

not in the mood for this, so just enjoy your day.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Avinash_Tyagi

Even pork projects create jobs, however if you're truly worried about pork there could be a board of people from public and private sector as well as engineers/architects/city planners/etc. to decide how the money is distributed.

Also You can argue that the buck stops with the President, but that's not how our political system works.

the Congress must pass laws and bills, the President can only execute laws (he has limited executive action powers, but that is not anything like a law or bill).

Until congress actually decides to play ball on the issues he can do little.

Remember this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyeJ55o3El0

A board? LOL. Yes because a central planning committee worked SO well in socialist countries. Local, state, and federal agencies already work with contractors including the professions you mention. Any new board would be redundant anyways.

[Avinash_Tyagi]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

A board? LOL. Yes because a central planning committee worked SO well in socialist countries. Local, state, and federal agencies already work with contractors including the professions you mention. Any new board would be redundant anyways.

It's clear you completely misunderstood my comment.

The board I suggested would not be a central planning committee, read what I wrote, they would merely decide who would get the money (note where I said "decide how the money is distributed"), Planning would still fall to state and local planners. The board would just hand out money.

I actually agree with you that it wouldn't be necessary, but Chico was worried about Pork projects, having an independent third party would help to prevent that (not that I think its necessary, as many projects referred to as Pork have had positive economic benefits)