Some questions for Republicans

[xssve]

These are just off the top of my head in fifteen seconds ( I'm not even trying hard )


Government mandated Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ( MTBE ) oxygenates, 1993.


Government subsidized and mandated corn-based ( i.e., maize ) ethanol (as opposed to sugar-based [ which is prohibited ] ) as a gasoline additive, 2006.


Government mandated award of wireless spectrum to minority operator ( c. 1993 ) [ the minority owner did not have the capital necessary to build the wireless infrastructure and ultimately declared bankruptcy; by filing for bankruptcy, the owners were enabled to auction the spectrum to the highest bidder { thereby reaping a windfall profit simply because of the original award }].


Department of Energy ( 1979-1986 )
( gurarantees provided- zero, nil, none, nada )


Federal National Mortgage Association ( a/k/a "Fannie Mae" ) 1938
( bankrupt, 2008- cost to taxpayers, $100 billion-?????)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae


Federal Home Loan Mortgage Association ( a/k/a "Freddie Mac" ) 1970
( bankrupt, 2008- cost to taxpayers, $100 billion ?????)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freddie_Mac


The Savings & Loan Industry
( bankrupt, 1990- cost to taxpayers, $125 billion-?????? )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_loan_crisis

At what point do you separate "government" from special interests?

As I recall the S&L debacle was the result of deregulation.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have operated at a "profit" since 1933 - they got into trouble when they exceeded their mandate and started dabbling in Prime real estate, which is where the spec sharks operate.

By this logic, GM should have never incorporated, or any firm, for that matter, that gets into trouble at any point.

Hint, we would have no airline, or automobile industries, or much of any industry for that matter - what is the multiplier effect of the National highway system? The regulatory environment in mass media?

You want to debate externalities, it cuts both ways.

One of the reasons GM is in trouble, is that the bulk of their cash is tied up in pension funds, which include healthcare - it's a little thing called "dependency ratio".

Believe me, every firm with a pension fund or healthcare plan has their fingers crossed that some form of healthcare will pass, it will greatly reduce the cost of doing business for them, and that means more jobs, at least theoretically.

The opposition is largely the healthcare industry itself, which has become accustomed to bloated profits.

Take a look at the overhead costs of Medicaid and Medicare compared to the average HMO, and guess why the premiums are so high.

Guess what? Government workers do have salary caps, and bonuses are extremely limited - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are private companies, and the shit that happened under Raines was a direct result of the Bonus program he instituted - it was right then they started cooking the books to maximize their bonuses.

Bonuses are tricky: a bonus is incentive, and people respond to that incentive - if the incentive is diseconomic, guess what's going to happen?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

BRONZEAGE is full of shit, per usual.

For much of our history private investors created and operated conveyances in America.

My ancestor built the first railroads in Florida during the 1830s. He did it with his money plus funds he collected from investors. The line still exists, hauling timber and cotton and other freight from Georgia to the Gulf.

At the same time this state tried to build a 25 mile track from Tallahassee to the Gulf and couldnt do it. So they hired my ancestor to build the track. Beyond that it took the state 30 years to replace mules with steam engines, and that only occurred after they sold the track to a real railroad.

You need to understand that BRONZEAGE buys snake-oil by the the keg then drains it till his belly can hold no more and its impossible for him to shuffle one step further. So he rolls his eyes, smacks his lips, rubs his belly, and lies down to sleep and dream of snakes and pink elephants and ObamaCare. Snakeoil is his epistemology.

 

[bronzeage]

I'm sorry your diaper is full again. Your attendant will be back in the morning.

If it's such a great deal, why aren't you in the private enterprise bridge building and operating business?

 

[trysail]

The toll road and bridge business has been essentially monopolized by government. All the early roads and bridges were built and operated privately. If there was enough demand to justify the building of a bridge, it occurred. The Ambassador Bridge over the Niagara River is a reminder of that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambassador_Bridge

The bridge over the Susquehanna River ( at the head of the Chesapeake Bay ) was privately built and operated until government seized it by means of eminent domain.

Numerous toll roads that were part of the country's original infrastructure were all privately developed and operated.

I've just finished Robert Caro's magnificent biography of Robert Moses, The Power Broker. It's the story of a man who ran roughshod over New York and accumulated immense power through abuse of the state's Triborough Bridge Authority. Moses and his various Authorities operated as a virtual tyrant in the '30s, '40s and '50s, arbitrarily displacing hundreds of thousands of people in NYC without regard to the havoc that was wreaked.

 

[trysail]

... Believe me, every firm with a pension fund or healthcare plan has their fingers crossed that some form of healthcare will pass, it will greatly reduce the cost of doing business for them, and that means more jobs, at least theoretically...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aREWycel8b2Y

Verizon Joins AT&T in Booking Costs From Health-Care

April 2 (Bloomberg) -- Verizon Communications Inc., the second-largest U.S. phone company, became the latest company to record a cost related to the U.S. health-care overhaul, saying it will incur a $970 million expense.

The one-time, non-cash cost will be taken in the first quarter, New York-based Verizon said late yesterday in a regulatory filing.

Verizon follows AT&T Inc., the biggest U.S. carrier, Deere & Co., Caterpillar Inc. and other companies in disclosing similar expenses after losing a tax benefit for retiree plans. The costs may reduce corporate profits by as much as $14 billion as companies account for the impact of the health-care reforms, according to benefits consulting firm Towers Watson...

 

[bronzeage]

A bridge is not something that works well in a competitive market. You build a bridge and then I build one right beside you. Then some guy opens a ferry business.

Bridges are now the responsibility of the government more for safety reasons than for revenue. The bridge is built by private enterprise, but it is the government's duty to see that it is properly maintained and safe to cross.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

A bridge is not something that works well in a competitive market. You build a bridge and then I build one right beside you. Then some guy opens a ferry business.

Bridges are now the responsibility of the government more for safety reasons than for revenue. The bridge is built by private enterprise, but it is the government's duty to see that it is properly maintained and safe to cross.

Yeah that's working well isn't it? How many bridges in your area should be condemned if they weren't government owned? How are those potholes coming in the roads? Are they getting bigger? Fixed?

 

[trysail]

Government mandated award of wireless spectrum to minority operator ( c. 1993 ) [ the minority owner did not have the capital necessary to build the wireless infrastructure and ultimately declared bankruptcy; by filing for bankruptcy, the owners were enabled to auction the spectrum to the highest bidder { thus reaping a windfall profit simply because of the original award } ].

I'd forgotten how egregious this particular boondoggle was and I misremembered some of the detail in an earlier post.


I've always been astonished that somebody hasn't write a book about the fiasco. I've never understood why there wasn't more publicity about it. It's a story that defies belief and needs to be told.


When Congress ordered the auction of wireless spectrum in the early '90s, it mandated a special auction for minority bidders. It became an absurdity the likes of which only occurs in the miasma of the Potomac sinkhole.


The winning minority bidder didn't have the cash to actually pay for their bid. When the Federal government attempted to foreclose upon and repossess the spectrum, the bidder declared bankruptcy. After protracted litigation, the minority owner prevailed over the government's attempt to regain the spectrum. The minority owner then conducted its own auction of the wireless spectrum and sold it to the highest bidders ( McCaw, Cingular, BellSouth, Bell Atlantic et al back in those days )


The entire fiasco was a gigantic ripoff of the government and taxpayers. In essence, the boondoggle resulted in billions of dollars of taxpayer funds simply being handed over to politically connected supporters ( I believe the Johnson family was a prime beneficiary ) of folk like Charlie Rangel, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

 

[bronzeage]

Yeah that's working well isn't it? How many bridges in your area should be condemned if they weren't government owned? How are those potholes coming in the roads? Are they getting bigger? Fixed?

Were you on the debate team in high school?

There would be a lot more pressure to keep a bridge open if it were a private enterprise operation. The sort of pressure put on fire marshalls when they want to close a building because it is a fire trap.

I live in the state with the more bridges per mile than any other(this means we have a lot of bridges). I have a few friends who are bridge inspectors. It's what they do all day long. When a bridge is found to be unsafe, it is closed to traffic. No one is really concerned that it is state property.

I think most of our bridges are safer than a Toyota accelerator pedal or Chinese pet food. Private enterprise has a lot of great qualities, but caring about public safety is not one of them.

Pot holes are filled with tax money. If you want better roads, either pay more or drive less. Your choice.

 

[cloudy]

It helps if one understands the economics. Governments do not have profits or losses.

I understand economics just fine, thanks. I lack just six course hours having a BS in it (to go along with my BS in Mgmt, and my BA in English).

What I was saying (and I should have elaborated, sorry) was that a government-run program should theoretically run right on the money, spending no more than it brings in, and taking in no more than it spends. Of course, nothing is run that way - not even the tightest run business functions that way - but expecting any government program to run at a loss is not even close to realistic.

 

[sr71plt]

Funny Zeb asked about potholes. The governor of Virginia declared the last two weeks a "pothole fix" campaign and he put extra workers out there. We're still having those big rains, but the crews are keeping well ahead of the fixes.

My daughter has lived on a private (community association) road for six years. There are some potholes on that road that are older than her house.

To argue that private enterprise can take care of either roads or bridges as well as or cheaper per user than the government can is really pretty idiotic--but typical of some of our nut job posters here.

 

[JackLuis]

I went looking for potholes one time, but gave up after finding no pot in any of 'em.

 

[bronzeage]

I understand economics just fine, thanks. I lack just six course hours having a BS in it (to go along with my BS in Mgmt, and my BA in English).

What I was saying (and I should have elaborated, sorry) was that a government-run program should theoretically run right on the money, spending no more than it brings in, and taking in no more than it spends. Of course, nothing is run that way - not even the tightest run business functions that way - but expecting any government program to run at a loss is not even close to realistic.

This maybe an argument of semantics, but unless a government project is intended to produce income, it can't have a loss or a gain.

In some places, the government is expected to keep snow off the roads. I have never seen this in practice, but I am told it happens a lot. If the budget for snow removal is set for average snowfall, some years they will go over budget and some years they go over. A blizzard breaks the budget.

There is no way to "run on the money".

 

[cloudy]

Yep, semantics, really.

Theory is well and good, but nothing ever functions exactly how theory says it should, especially when you add human behavior to the mix.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Funny Zeb asked about potholes. The governor of Virginia declared the last two weeks a "pothole fix" campaign and he put extra workers out there. We're still having those big rains, but the crews are keeping well ahead of the fixes.

My daughter has lived on a private (community association) road for six years. There are some potholes on that road that are older than her house.

To argue that private enterprise can take care of either roads or bridges as well as or cheaper per user than the government can is really pretty idiotic--but typical of some of our nut job posters here.

Must be the new GOP governor Virginia elected.

 

[bronzeage]

Funny Zeb asked about potholes. The governor of Virginia declared the last two weeks a "pothole fix" campaign and he put extra workers out there. We're still having those big rains, but the crews are keeping well ahead of the fixes.

My daughter has lived on a private (community association) road for six years. There are some potholes on that road that are older than her house.

To argue that private enterprise can take care of either roads or bridges as well as or cheaper per user than the government can is really pretty idiotic--but typical of some of our nut job posters here.

Many years ago, I was president of the Home owners association for my neighborhood. One of my constituents stopped me and asked, "When are we going to get our street resurfaced?"

It was in pretty rough shape at that time. The pavement was about 10 years old. I asked her how much she paid in property taxes the previous year. She had no idea.

I knew exactly how much she paid, because I paid the same amount. This was 1992 and my state and local property taxes were about $36. In Louisiana, property taxes are believed to be immoral. We tax the fuck out of business to make up the difference.

Each of the home owners in our association had claim to a piece of asphalt, 100 feet long and 10 feet wide. A corner lot would be 3 times that amount. Thirty six dollars does not buy a lot of asphalt. We had to wait until the local government collected property taxes from the big chemical plants out by the river, before they could repair our street.

After I explained it this way, she says, "I never thought of that."

 

[sr71plt]

Must be the new GOP governor Virginia elected.

Why, yes it is. Plans are to close two of the schools in our county--and one of the public libraries--and tuition is rising at UVa again because the state is cutting its contribution to state colleges. But, what the hell, the potholes are being filled and the tourist reststops being reopened.

But you gotta pick and choose your priorities when there are so many numbskulls around who don't understand what they are getting from government services for what they are paying for them (or are too dogmatic to acknowledge what their real self-interest is).

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Many years ago, I was president of the Home owners association for my neighborhood. One of my constituents stopped me and asked, "When are we going to get our street resurfaced?"

It was in pretty rough shape at that time. The pavement was about 10 years old. I asked her how much she paid in property taxes the previous year. She had no idea.

I knew exactly how much she paid, because I paid the same amount. This was 1992 and my state and local property taxes were about $36. In Louisiana, property taxes are believed to be immoral. We tax the fuck out of business to make up the difference.

Each of the home owners in our association had claim to a piece of asphalt, 100 feet long and 10 feet wide. A corner lot would be 3 times that amount. Thirty six dollars does not buy a lot of asphalt. We had to wait until the local government collected property taxes from the big chemical plants out by the river, before they could repair our street.

After I explained it this way, she says, "I never thought of that."

And your point is irrelevant since re-paving projects are covered by the city's budget NOT how much tax you pay for your trailer.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Why, yes it is. Plans are to close two of the schools in our county--and one of the public libraries--and tuition is rising at UVa again because the state is cutting its contribution to state colleges. But, what the hell, the potholes are being filled and the tourist reststops being reopened.

But you gotta pick and choose your priorities when there are so many numbskulls around who don't understand what they are getting from government services for what they are paying for them (or are too dogmatic to acknowledge what their real self-interest is).

I take your point and add that government often uses tax money for other purposes. My county commission recently gave a private resort 13 MILLION bucks to build a tennis arena for use of private guests and tournament ticket buyers. They took the money from the county parks & recreation budget. The state unemployment service is presently under the gun for using millions to pay for parties and dinners for management cuz their spirits are so low from all the jobless people.

 

[bronzeage]

And your point is irrelevant since re-paving projects are covered by the city's budget NOT how much tax you pay for your trailer.

Calm down, Alice. Were you on the debate team, too.

From where does the city's budget money come?

 

[sr71plt]

I take your point and add that government often uses tax money for other purposes. My county commission recently gave a private resort 13 MILLION bucks to build a tennis arena for use of private guests and tournament ticket buyers. They took the money from the county parks & recreation budget. The state unemployment service is presently under the gun for using millions to pay for parties and dinners for management cuz their spirits are so low from all the jobless people.

And you can use that against them in the next election, and they'll be tossed out of office as an example of what not to do and have to walk around the community with that hanging on their reputation forever--unless a majority of the electorate is as dumb as a doorpost (which, unfortunately, sometimes is the case).

We always have those "but . . . but . . ." examples (many of which are myths) trooped out of malfeasance on the margin. That doesn't mean that, on the whole, government services for what we pay aren't the steal of the century.

 

[Katyusha]

Here is my issue; the government did nothing to address the cost only to shift payment for insurance. Yes 36 million or what ever the number is will now be eligible for healthcare but that someone else will be taxed for. When has the government operated any successful program that was at or below costs?

You mean budget estimates?

In the next couple of years a insurance exchange will come on line: Great! Why didn’t they create an exchange years ago? Why does blue cross need to have 50 entities and not one? Why add many layers of wasteful spending?

You'd have to ask previous presidents and Congresses that. And possibly previous state governments too. I have no idea why they weren't created years ago. I have no idea why any of this wasn't addressed years ago.

I just don’t understand the notion of pouring more money into a failing system. Why not start over and recreate a less costly health care system?

Well, given that our failing health insurance industry is entirely private (Medicare/Medicaid notwithstanding), how would you suggest starting over and creating a less costly system?

This is how I view this healthcare bill…How would you feel if 30 million Americans were given free cars and that everyone who has a car will be hit with a 10% value added tax and the price of your car insurance will be jumping up by a minimum of 30% to help cover the cost of adding 30 million American’s?

WHAT free healthcare? Who's getting anything for free out of this? WHERE are people getting that idea from? It's tighter controls on health insurance companies. There IS NO public option in this bill, there IS NO free health insurance in this bill.

To address your questions though, I wouldn't be paying any taxes that those 30 million Americans who suddenly got the "free" cars weren't also paying. The tax would be on everyone, and those 30 million would be paying the tax for *their* cars in addition to paying the tax for any future cars *I* got under that system. In a system like this, everyone pays for THEMSELVES, AS WELL AS everyone else. It isn't me paying for you while you pay nothing at all. It's not the "haves" footing the entire bill for the "have-nots." The why-should-I-pay-for-others question, when it comes to health insurance doesn't, and never has, made any sense to me.

The only way I can see that attitude as sensible would be if the tax to pay for it was ONLY on the well-to-do in this country. A tax on ONLY the rich for something as costly as a national healthcare program would suffer budget failure before it ever got off the ground.

But, back to your example, cars are a luxury, not a necessity. People don't NEED cars. They can walk, they can ride a bike, ride a scooter, take the bus, take the train, get into a vanpool, catch rides with friends, etc. And if I can't afford to pay insurance on a car, then I have other options for transportation. Healthcare is entirely different. People NEED to be able to see their doctors. They NEED to receive emergency treatment, *receive preventive care,* stay in a hospital, see a specialist, get medication, etc. There are no viable alternatives like there are with transportation. If I need to see a doctor and I can't afford to pay for it, and I can't afford insurance premiums (like an ever-increasing number of the middle class can't), what's my alternative? What would you then suggest I do?

I do agree with the argument that a family shouldn’t have to make the decision on whether to pay rent or a health insurance premium.

So then what's the solution?

Disclaimer I do state that we have great benefits and when the cost of those benefits started to skyrocket our company did something different by in most cases tripling the deductible. To offset that cost for employees the company set up an HSA program and each year transfers a payment to cover that deductible. Company saved a ton of money and employees are covered.

So for us we will not receive any benefit (unless this new exchange actually works), but our taxes will be going up.

So if there's no benefit to you or your family personally, then it's bad for the entire country? The needs and desires of the few outweigh the needs and desires of the many? We shouldn't have to deal with anything we don't like or could inconvenience us even if it'll possibly serve the greater good?

And if this won't work at all, why not, and what WILL work? Because all I see right now from everyone who opposes this bill and opposes any kind of nationalized healthcare system at all is, "all it will do is make our taxes go up, and it won't work. It'll fail. Therefore we can't let it go forward." No real reasons for why it won't work, no alternatives, nothing. Just "it's a bad idea and it won't work."

 

[PoppingTom]

Debating CLOUDY is about the same as giving a child a loaded gun to play with. She'll either shoot her foot, shoot you in the ass, or shoot holes in her argument.

BRONZEAGE is full of shit, per usual.

Please, please, such a sentence about me !!

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

And you can use that against them in the next election, and they'll be tossed out of office as an example of what not to do and have to walk around the community with that hanging on their reputation forever--unless a majority of the electorate is as dumb as a doorpost (which, unfortunately, sometimes is the case).

We always have those "but . . . but . . ." examples (many of which are myths) trooped out of malfeasance on the margin. That doesn't mean that, on the whole, government services for what we pay aren't the steal of the century.

Heehee Our sissy governor is about to lose his job cuz of his Obama Man-hug (the man has some weird shit in his closet...he's Greek you know), so he wants the FBI to investigate his own GOP and friends he appointed to office. He's been at the state-house for 18 years and just noticed that the GOP are thieves.

I dont oppose guvmint spending per se; I have long advocated that we prioritize our druthers and fund the agencies adequately. But I do see us becoming the Weimar Republic in a few years.

 

[bronzeage]

Please, please, such a sentence about me !!

Ask him from where the money in a government budget comes. He seems to think it's not connected with collecting taxes.