The value of technical programs

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
It has ALWAYS been competitive. That is how it got to where it is.....was. The decline of industry is NEW and is NOT necessary . It is an act of greed, nothing more. That is the entire reason for shipping American dollars overseas and stealing jobs from American workers, and the revenue in taxes that those people could be providing, away from America and creating more debt as the system crumbles in this vacuum.


It is greed, but people in all nations are greedy and that's human nature. It is policy of the system that defines what a nation is in the long term.

When you have a political system favoring import businesses and a compensation system that reward cost cutting CEO and investment bankers, you will have cost cutting rather than growing production efficiency and new innovations that drive future profits.
 
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Who is "We" Overkill? If I did not know any better, I would have thought you were talking about USA :-)


I'm talking about North America, but much of my focus is on the US, which is why I made that distinction here and there throughout my post. Some of it applies to both the US and Canada.
 
Originally Posted By: Nick R
Humans are greedy, therefor they are human.


People are greedy, but most have a conscience. Corporations are greedy, but few have a conscience.
 
Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
50 years ago we needed those high tech advancements to stay 2-3 steps ahead of the Russians,..

It was the other way around in 1961

Originally Posted By: Al
We are a victim of our own success and there is no way a nation of hamburger stands and Walmarts can sustain the infrastructure end standard of life we have.
Success has always an element of self-destruction built-in
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: Nick R
Humans are greedy, therefor they are human.


People are greedy, but most have a conscience. Corporations are greedy, but few have a conscience.


Can government be greedy in your view?
 
Originally Posted By: buster
Thom Hartman and a Libertarian have it out and get to the "core" issue.

I almost fell out of my chair laughing at that!

He says that monopolies are bad, that power and corruption follow money, and that a majority of the regulations that the government has in place are to protect the big corporations. Yet, he wants the government, with its admittedly corrupt politicians, to have a monopoly power over the private sector!! This is the "logic" of people that believe in big government.

He also said that the role of government is to provide for the General Welfare. You will find this NOWHERE in the Constitution. The preamble states:
Quote:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

So PROVIDE for the common defense, and PROMOTE the General Welfare. These are VERY different things and this guy is flat out lying through is teeth about it.

And the General Welfare is fully, and completely, defined by Article 1, Section 8. If the government does more than is defined in that Section, it going beyond it's mandate, and is not promoting the General Welfare. This is further made clear in the 9th and 10th Amendments.
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: buster
Thom Hartman and a Libertarian have it out and get to the "core" issue.

I almost fell out of my chair laughing at that!

He says that monopolies are bad, that power and corruption follow money, and that a majority of the regulations that the government has in place are to protect the big corporations. Yet, he wants the government, with its admittedly corrupt politicians, to have a monopoly power over the private sector!! This is the "logic" of people that believe in big government.

He also said that the role of government is to provide for the General Welfare. You will find this NOWHERE in the Constitution. The preamble states:
Quote:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

So PROVIDE for the common defense, and PROMOTE the General Welfare. These are VERY different things and this guy is flat out lying through is teeth about it.

And the General Welfare is fully, and completely, defined by Article 1, Section 8. If the government does more than is defined in that Section, it going beyond it's mandate, and is not promoting the General Welfare. This is further made clear in the 9th and 10th Amendments.



Tempest, the point of this thread was to keep it from NOT being locked. Please try a little harder to contain your enthusiasm?
 
Originally Posted By: Nick R

Tempest, the point of this thread was to keep it from NOT being locked. Please try a little harder to contain your enthusiasm?

Just responding to what buster posted. Why didn't you make a post asking him not to post such a thing?

And the OP said:
Quote:
Thom makes a fantastic argument. I don't disagree with anything he's said.

Regarding buster's post. So I am also responding to the OP.
 
Last edited:
Tempest you completely miss the point and simply have this twisted view of how successful societies operate.


I told you before, move to Somalia to enjoy your government free Libertarian paradise.
smile.gif
 
Quote:
Tempest you completely miss the point and simply have this twisted view of how successful societies operate.

Yet, this is all you post. Please specifically educate all of us how successful societies operate.

Learn me.

Somalia is ruled by dictators, where the rule of law, right to contract, and person property rights don't exist. Complete opposite of libertarianism.
 
Last edited:
Thom hit several outta the park... as long as the sheeple lie down and do nothing then the big fellas are free to run the country the way they want.

get enough of us mad and maybe we'll do something. Just maybe.
 
Quote:
get enough of us mad and maybe we'll do something. Just maybe.

Please tell me what that "something" is. Rioting in the streets? Confiscation of other people's property without due process?

Please educate all of us.
 
Originally Posted By: buster


I told you before, move to Somalia to enjoy your government free Libertarian paradise.
smile.gif



I wasn't aware that Libertarianism and the Rule of Law were mutually exclusive concepts.
 
As to the OP, I agree.

The value of technical programs funded by the government is all around us in every day life. Often the impetus for that initial investment has to come from the public sector as the profit motive is not so readily apparent to have the private sector investing at the levels they might otherwise.
 
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
As to the OP, I agree.

The value of technical programs funded by the government is all around us in every day life. Often the impetus for that initial investment has to come from the public sector as the profit motive is not so readily apparent to have the private sector investing at the levels they might otherwise.

Like methanol? How about green jobs that are costing $4.8 million a piece?
 
Waste is waste Tempest, regardless of where the initial investment came from. Common sense may be lacking in many cases where free money gets thrown around, and that should be corrected. But it doesn't change the fact that public money can and often does provide a good head start to new technologies and their implementation.

None of us would have GPS if the public sector hadn't invested billions of our dollars in the hardware needed. Luckily, the cost and the purpose were of dual benefit to both the government and their constitutionally mandated purpose and the people who paid for it. This situation like many others, the federal highway system for one, with both military need and public benefit, demonstrate that the government can serve it's purpose and the general good at the same time.

Pointing that out, in no way makes it true that I believe that is the case in all or even most situations, I clearly dont. It just so happens where public and private interests can be aligned in some situations.
 
Quote:
Common sense may be lacking in many cases where free money gets thrown around, and that should be corrected.

But it never is, and that is why it matters where the initial investment came from.

The OP wants lots of government spending on technical programs. OK. What is the effectiveness criteria for funding these things? Where is the reports on how efficient these things are run and what comes out of it?

Who makes the decisions on these things? I would like to see answer on this.

The government can't even bodge together a budget yet these people are supposed run highly technical projects well?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
US present value total debt
Replies
13
Views
3K
Oldwolf
K
  • Locked
Got this in my email - Social Security info
Replies
9
Views
1K
darryld13
MolaKule
  • Locked
Social Security
Replies
7
Views
943
JohnnyO
T
  • Locked
$101 trillion
2 3
Replies
44
Views
12K
ConfederateTyrant
H
  • Locked
Chinese are Gamblers, Macau $27B vs Vegas $6B
Replies
3
Views
764
azjake
Back
Top Bottom