The "Obama" of 2016

[Texsox]

I'm fully prepared to stick my head in the sand until 2017. With the trends in politics, I see this as the ugliest election ever. I hope I am wrong.

[DukeNukeEm]

Many libertarians/fiscal conservatives will tell you that roads/infrastructure is one of the best ways for government to spend its money. It's just this modern ultra-right tea party group that's trying to get everybody to believe that all government spending is bad.

Actually the correct answer is that the money is better left with the people. The taxes we pay are for protection against stuff that wants to hurt us that we cannot fight individually (like Canada invading or something). Though I'm sure since all the roads are physically there and transitioning their ownership to the private world would be the most corrupt scene imaginable some small government people are OK with the status quo in that specific instance.

 

But the entire idea of "best ways to spend money" doesnt apply. Theres no such thing, the philosophy says that every cent given to the government is basically wasted in the process while the broader public gets an extemely narrow portion it for commom benefit.

 

**NOTE TO ALL THAT WHILE THE WORD "ROAD" IS IN THIS POST WHAT IM SAYING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY JOB AND IT DOES NOT BEAR BRINGING UP**

[cabiness42]

Actually the correct answer is that the money is better left with the people. The taxes we pay are for protection against stuff that wants to hurt us that we cannot fight individually (like Canada invading or something). Though I'm sure since all the roads are physically there and transitioning their ownership to the private world would be the most corrupt scene imaginable some small government people are OK with the status quo in that specific instance.

 

But the entire idea of "best ways to spend money" doesnt apply. Theres no such thing, the philosophy says that every cent given to the government is basically wasted in the process while the broader public gets an extemely narrow portion it for commom benefit.

 

**NOTE TO ALL THAT WHILE THE WORD "ROAD" IS IN THIS POST WHAT IM SAYING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY JOB AND IT DOES NOT BEAR BRINGING UP**

 

The "correct answer" to you, and not to any single other person I've ever met.

 

[caulfield12]

Actually the correct answer is that the money is better left with the people. The taxes we pay are for protection against stuff that wants to hurt us that we cannot fight individually (like Canada invading or something). Though I'm sure since all the roads are physically there and transitioning their ownership to the private world would be the most corrupt scene imaginable some small government people are OK with the status quo in that specific instance.

 

But the entire idea of "best ways to spend money" doesnt apply. Theres no such thing, the philosophy says that every cent given to the government is basically wasted in the process while the broader public gets an extemely narrow portion it for commom benefit.

 

**NOTE TO ALL THAT WHILE THE WORD "ROAD" IS IN THIS POST WHAT IM SAYING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY JOB AND IT DOES NOT BEAR BRINGING UP**

 

 

I never knew that Social Security, national parks or Medicare were out to harm us...

 

This is where you argue that both of these systems should be privatized, right? And yet what is your solution for the 80-90% of the people in America who have no idea how to manage their money correctly?

 

For another example, with the privatization of the prison system, it has become a race to see people locked up for the maximum amount of time for lots of petty offenses due to the single/solitary incentive to run the system being the profit motivation, not whether it's "good" or "bad" for our country as a whole.

 

It works the same way for schools, where many charter schools in Kansas City (where I lived) were only concerned with collecting money from the government for those students showing up to class (they even paid them an incentive to show up because the financial loss of a student for one day absent was a lot greater if they weren't there at all, compared to giving up 25% as a motivator/incentive).

 

 

Finally, Alan Greenspan was such a devout disciple of Ayn Rand...yet didn't he go wrong somewhere along the way?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[caulfield12]

Actually the correct answer is that the money is better left with the people. The taxes we pay are for protection against stuff that wants to hurt us that we cannot fight individually (like Canada invading or something). Though I'm sure since all the roads are physically there and transitioning their ownership to the private world would be the most corrupt scene imaginable some small government people are OK with the status quo in that specific instance.

 

But the entire idea of "best ways to spend money" doesnt apply. Theres no such thing, the philosophy says that every cent given to the government is basically wasted in the process while the broader public gets an extemely narrow portion it for commom benefit.

 

**NOTE TO ALL THAT WHILE THE WORD "ROAD" IS IN THIS POST WHAT IM SAYING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MY JOB AND IT DOES NOT BEAR BRINGING UP**

 

 

You would be happier if EVERY road in the US was a toll road? What about every street in your neighborhood?

 

If every single bridge had a toll to cross it?

 

Every time you crossed state lines, another tax or fee?

 

What redress would you have if a single company had a monopoly and controlled all the streets in your city or even state and you had no way (alternative routes) of driving without incurring prohibitive expenses?

 

 

[StrangeSox]

And push the Soviets over the cliff in the process. Taken together, that may have been the best thing he did as President. But it is really not a "conservative" method, since he was spending a ton of government money. Furthermore, he also dramatically increased spending on roads and infrastructure, as well as block grants to the states. He did a bunch of things that are often characterized as liberal policies.

 

Reagan didn't kill the ussr.

 

He also had some really awful foreign policy in Latin America, plus the whole "ignore aids" thing. He was pretty terrible.

 

[DukeNukeEm]

I never knew that Social Security, national parks or Medicare were out to harm us...

 

This is where you argue that both of these systems should be privatized, right? And yet what is your solution for the 80-90% of the people in America who have no idea how to manage their money correctly?

 

For another example, with the privatization of the prison system, it has become a race to see people locked up for the maximum amount of time for lots of petty offenses due to the single/solitary incentive to run the system being the profit motivation, not whether it's "good" or "bad" for our country as a whole.

 

It works the same way for schools, where many charter schools in Kansas City (where I lived) were only concerned with collecting money from the government for those students showing up to class (they even paid them an incentive to show up because the financial loss of a student for one day absent was a lot greater if they weren't there at all, compared to giving up 25% as a motivator/incentive).

 

 

Finally, Alan Greenspan was such a devout disciple of Ayn Rand...yet didn't he go wrong somewhere along the way?

Prisons shouldnt be privatized. Thats a legitimate arm of government. Its sad that they are, but it just shows how f***ing backwards are government's priorities are. You cant trust the market to run a legal system, just like you couldnt trust them to run a military. Its just the odd nature of those things.

 

And yea, I like the National Parks. I do, I f***ing admit it. I dont mind that money for personal reasons derived from me just liking something. Protect that land, I'm with it 100%. It probably has something to do though with there being a million white trash families of idiots suckling off the state who I couldnt give half a s*** about adversely harming by cutting them off while theres only one Glacier, Yosemite, Mt Rainier in the world and it would be sad if it turned into a dumb theme park marketed to the aforementioned trash.

 

By the way (and its funny that my throwaway comment better responss to the theme of your post than the past two paragraphs so if you want me to expand I will) this isnt creating a problem for the fijancially incompetent, its a solution to them.

 

[DukeNukeEm]

You would be happier if EVERY road in the US was a toll road? What about every street in your neighborhood?

 

If every single bridge had a toll to cross it?

 

Every time you crossed state lines, another tax or fee?

 

What redress would you have if a single company had a monopoly and controlled all the streets in your city or even state and you had no way (alternative routes) of driving without incurring prohibitive expenses?

You pay the toll anyways whether you use it or not. That money is coming out of your pocket. And they couldnt just charge whatever they wanted or theyd be stuck paying property tax (I think this is the only tax that is ethical) on a bunch of highway.

 

Wouldnt be a monopoly either. Theyd face stiff competition from rail and clever people who buy one license for the road then bus them around it. What it costs for your license plate and sticker would probably be more than enough.

 

Also, its illegal for anyone to charge money to cross state lines. Like.... way illegal.

[cabiness42]

Also, its illegal for anyone to charge money to cross state lines. Like.... way illegal.

 

Thank god for government regulations!

[DukeNukeEm]

Thank god for government regulations!

In the most obvious form ever. Its a country, with citizens, you cant charge them to move around in it.

 

Thats not even regulation really, no more than rape or murder is a regulation.

[caulfield12]

Prisons shouldnt be privatized. Thats a legitimate arm of government. Its sad that they are, but it just shows how f***ing backwards are government's priorities are. You cant trust the market to run a legal system, just like you couldnt trust them to run a military. Its just the odd nature of those things.

 

And yea, I like the National Parks. I do, I f***ing admit it. I dont mind that money for personal reasons derived from me just liking something. Protect that land, I'm with it 100%. It probably has something to do though with there being a million white trash families of idiots suckling off the state who I couldnt give half a s*** about adversely harming by cutting them off while theres only one Glacier, Yosemite, Mt Rainier in the world and it would be sad if it turned into a dumb theme park marketed to the aforementioned trash.

 

By the way (and its funny that my throwaway comment better responss to the theme of your post than the past two paragraphs so if you want me to expand I will) this isnt creating a problem for the fijancially incompetent, its a solution to them.

 

 

If people learned how to take care of themselves financially, to make their own decisions, to allocate their own money....that would be a great thing. But along with Social Security, you have those hundreds of thousands with 401-k's through their own companies, you can bet all those corporations and advisors wouldn't want people to manage things by themselves. So it's not just the government, although you can probably ding Washington for incentivizing (via tax credits) the whole idea of saving for retirement.

 

The problem is that these suddenly enlightened people might decide that instead of going to a theme park or McDonald's, they also would be much better off (and their children and grandchildren) going to Little Big Horn, Wounded Knee/Crazy Horse Monument (another example where privatization isn't working) or Glacier/Yosemite/Mt. Rainier...and it would be overcrowded to the point where you wouldn't enjoy it and would have no choice but to withdraw from society like the characters in an Ayn Rand novel (or the Unabomber).

 

 

 

 

[caulfield12]

In the most obvious form ever. Its a country, with citizens, you cant charge them to move around in it.

 

Thats not even regulation really, no more than rape or murder is a regulation.

 

 

Sure you can. In China or Russia, your entire identity (residence permit) is based in the city/area/province where you're born.

 

If you want to relocate, you have to either get married or pay a pretty hefty bribe. Even in those situations where families relocate to find higher-paying jobs (think of factory or migrant farm workers), they're unable to enroll their children in the local schools because their children are forced to stay behind with relatives in their hometown OR they simply have to stay at home.

[DukeNukeEm]

Look I'll be happy to have this discussion in another thread. But this is about Elizabeth Warren winning the presidency in 2016 and me being very sad about that.

[caulfield12]

Look I'll be happy to have this discussion in another thread. But this is about Elizabeth Warren winning the presidency in 2016 and me being very sad about that.

 

 

Elizabeth Warren just doesn't have enough of a national constituency at this point.

 

Ralph Nader was 10X more famous as a consumer rights advocate. Granted, he didn't run as a Democrat with only two candidates at a time when the GOP was shooting itself in the foot constantly (before the ObamaCare fiasco at least).

 

 

Personally, as a Democrat, if Hillary doesn't run, I would pick one of those four.

 

Candidate Odds

Hillary Clinton 5/1

Joe Biden 8/1

Andrew Cuomo 12/1

Rahm Emmanuel 15/1

Evan Bayh 15/1

Martin O’Malley 15/1

Tim Kaine 15/1

Mark Warner 18/1

Elizabeth Warren 20/1

Dennis Kucinich 20/1

Amy Klobuchar 20/1

Jim Webb 25/1

Brian Schweitzer 25/1

Sherrod Brown 30/1

Kathleen Sebelius 30/1

Claire McCaskill 30/1

Kirsten Gillibrand 35/1

Bob Casey, Jr. 35/1

Janet Napolitano 40/1

Ken Salazar 50/1

Kay Hagan 50/1

John Tester 50/1

Harold Ford, Jr. 100/1

Bill Ritter 100/1

Edited November 14, 2013 by caulfield12

[pettie4sox]

Look I'll be happy to have this discussion in another thread. But this is about Elizabeth Warren winning the presidency in 2016 and me being very sad about that.

 

You have to blame the republicans for putting out s*** product. No one is buying what they are selling except the usual suspects.

[caulfield12]

Candidate Odds

Chris Christie 7/1

Marco Rubio 8/1

Sarah Palin 10/1

Paul Ryan 12/1

Rand Paul 15/1

Jeb Bush 18/1

Mike Huckabee 18/1

Eric Cantor 20/1

Mike Pence 20/1

Bob McDonnell 25/1

John Kasich 28/1

John Thune 30/1

Jon Huntsman 30/1

Bobby Jindal 30/1

Luis Fortuño 35/1

Jim Demint 35/1

Scott Walker 35/1

Scott Brown 35/1

Ken Cuccinelli 40/1

Rob Portman 40/1

Rick Santorum 40/1

Tim Pawlenty 40/1

Nikki Haley 40/1

Susana Martinez 40/1

Kelly Ayote 45/1

Rick Perry 45/1

Mitch Daniels 50/1

Julian Castro 75/1

Newt Gingrich 100/1

Pat Toomey 100/1

[caulfield12]

You have to blame the republicans for putting out s*** product. No one is buying what they are selling except the usual suspects.

 

 

At some point, they have to go back on the offensive (not just defensive/obstruction) and actually offer some constructive proposals of their own that could conceivably draw bipartisan support.

[DukeNukeEm]

And Warren can gain a national constituency in about a week. "Wait, I can hate that repulsive Hillary Clinton and still Vote to Make History ", Warrens got it. The Democrats are addicted to the idea of a woman president but nobody likes Hillary. Like Obama, Warren is an unknown commodity, people arent sick of her s***.

 

She's already got it won unless Obama can not find a way to keep the wheels from completely falling off his healthcare mess before election day. Just watch, shes in a perfect position right now and her people are already playing coy. Get the hardcore party loyalists hooked on her and it trickles down. Just like with Obama.

[Jake]

And push the Soviets over the cliff in the process. Taken together, that may have been the best thing he did as President. But it is really not a "conservative" method, since he was spending a ton of government money. Furthermore, he also dramatically increased spending on roads and infrastructure, as well as block grants to the states. He did a bunch of things that are often characterized as liberal policies.

 

There are a lot of people that disagree with that idea

 

I'd say the most interesting thing he did on the liberal end of the spectrum was telling Gorbachev that he wanted to completely dismantle their nuclear arsenals. His stupid-ass SDI ended up nixing the deal; he wouldn't give it up and Gorbachev was one of the two people in the world that believe SDI was a real thing that could happen. The other was Reagan

[Jenksismyhero]

Candidate Odds

Chris Christie 7/1

Marco Rubio 8/1

Sarah Palin 10/1

Paul Ryan 12/1

Rand Paul 15/1

Jeb Bush 18/1

Mike Huckabee 18/1

Eric Cantor 20/1

Mike Pence 20/1

Bob McDonnell 25/1

John Kasich 28/1

John Thune 30/1

Jon Huntsman 30/1

Bobby Jindal 30/1

Luis Fortuño 35/1

Jim Demint 35/1

Scott Walker 35/1

Scott Brown 35/1

Ken Cuccinelli 40/1

Rob Portman 40/1

Rick Santorum 40/1

Tim Pawlenty 40/1

Nikki Haley 40/1

Susana Martinez 40/1

Kelly Ayote 45/1

Rick Perry 45/1

Mitch Daniels 50/1

Julian Castro 75/1

Newt Gingrich 100/1

Pat Toomey 100/1

 

Laughable.

[caulfield12]

Laughable.

 

 

You're not going to complain about Ted Cruz not having ascended to the top tier yet?

 

I agree about Palin and Huckabee, and think Santorum's a lot more likely to run again than Huckabee (to represent the hard right Christian minority).

 

The Democrats would love to see Palin, Paul, Cruz or Santorum.

[southsider2k5]

Elizabeth Warren just doesn't have enough of a national constituency at this point.

 

Ralph Nader was 10X more famous as a consumer rights advocate. Granted, he didn't run as a Democrat with only two candidates at a time when the GOP was shooting itself in the foot constantly (before the ObamaCare fiasco at least).

 

 

Personally, as a Democrat, if Hillary doesn't run, I would pick one of those four.

 

Candidate Odds

Hillary Clinton 5/1

Joe Biden 8/1

Andrew Cuomo 12/1

Rahm Emmanuel 15/1

Evan Bayh 15/1

Martin O’Malley 15/1

Tim Kaine 15/1

Mark Warner 18/1

Elizabeth Warren 20/1

Dennis Kucinich 20/1

Amy Klobuchar 20/1

Jim Webb 25/1

Brian Schweitzer 25/1

Sherrod Brown 30/1

Kathleen Sebelius 30/1

Claire McCaskill 30/1

Kirsten Gillibrand 35/1

Bob Casey, Jr. 35/1

Janet Napolitano 40/1

Ken Salazar 50/1

Kay Hagan 50/1

John Tester 50/1

Harold Ford, Jr. 100/1

Bill Ritter 100/1

 

Bayh basically quit the Senate because he thought things were too polarized. I doubt things have gotten any better in his eyes.

 

[Reddy]

Prisons shouldnt be privatized. Thats a legitimate arm of government. Its sad that they are, but it just shows how f***ing backwards are government's priorities are. You cant trust the market to run a legal system, just like you couldnt trust them to run a military. Its just the odd nature of those things.

 

And yea, I like the National Parks. I do, I f***ing admit it. I dont mind that money for personal reasons derived from me just liking something. Protect that land, I'm with it 100%. It probably has something to do though with there being a million white trash families of idiots suckling off the state who I couldnt give half a s*** about adversely harming by cutting them off while theres only one Glacier, Yosemite, Mt Rainier in the world and it would be sad if it turned into a dumb theme park marketed to the aforementioned trash.

 

By the way (and its funny that my throwaway comment better responss to the theme of your post than the past two paragraphs so if you want me to expand I will) this isnt creating a problem for the fijancially incompetent, its a solution to them.

 

 

My summation of Duke's views:

 

"If I personally enjoy something, the government should pay for it. All other things should be privatized"

 

Great stuff.

[southsider2k5]

My summation of Duke's views:

 

"If I personally enjoy something, the government should pay for it. All other things should be privatized"

 

Great stuff.

 

Honestly, that is everyone's view of government.

[StrangeSox]

Nah. I have good, affordable health insurance and have my entire life. But I'd still love an actually-socialized health insurance system, even if it meant my personal taxes went up. That would apply to my views on the whole range of social welfare programs.