Aristotle on Politics (Kebir Blue)

Regulations and the lack of being able to get loans for small businesses is a definite problem. I deal with small businesses every day and it's not just a problem of Washington regs. I live in Houston, one of the most business friendly environments in the US. And yet small businesses get "fee'd" to death. There are fees for having a safe in your business, for having a sign, for having a dumpster, which you don't own but rent. You can't even open a street vending taco stand without jumping through hoops. I could go on and on. This doesn't include all the forms a business has to fill out for local, state, and fed stuff. And as yet, there's not real new demand, so businesses aren't in need of loans. And yet the banks that caused a lot of our current problems are making record profits. Go figure. And finreg is turning out to be a joke. I heard that the derivitive markets that were going to be regulated by finreg, may not have any more regs than before. Because the little guy doesn't have lobbyists like the big guys, the little guy continues get screwed over.

Well spoken Parsifal

"Tax payers money going towards employing tax payers..."

But, are you suggesting government works?

Adding to the public sector payrolls through more public employees?

Here is what kills that.

Greed.(of the individual most likely on the left side of the isle by the way. No side of the political spectrum holds the monopoly on greed. Not the bankers, nor the city janitors)

ready....

pension spiking.

Im a registered nurse who has done OK(thankfully) through this entire debacle. Oh dear lord thank you for that blessing.

The other day, I was curious to see how my state employed brethren were doing.

I looked through public records which show local UC(University of California) employee's income.

Public workers in California have their income publicized on the web. Just have to find it. Its out there.

There is more then one RN getting paid between 140,000 and 160,000 dollars per year. These are mere staff nurses. Not Nurse practitioners or nurse Anesthetists. They are like me. Generalists.

They make about twice what I make. Can you guess how/why these nurses are making this much?

Simple, in the last year or two they plan to work, they kill them selves with overtime. This makes their retirement much higher. The calc is based off of those last quarters.

Say their base salary was 80,000. If they spike that salary with overtime they can increase their pensions by 50-100%. Double time is nice, no?

If They worked for 20 years they will get around 50% of 160,000.

Yup, 80,000.

Instead of a 40000 pension, they get 80,000. Now, expand that to every state and city worker. yes it can be nearly that bad. Federal is not so easy to game the system anymore, poor feds.

Thanks but no thanks.

I don't want to pay higher taxes so my neighbor, who is a public nurse, can retire 10 years before me while I continue to subsidize his retirement.

This is a time bomb which gets little press. Some city general funds have a 90% liability for payroll and pension payments. 90 cents of every budget dollar goes to city payroll and city pensions.

Is this sustainable?

LOL, no.....

Ummmm, look at bell California.

If pension liabilities weight to heavy on a company, say GM, the company fails. If pension liabilities weight to heavy on the City of LA, they raise taxes.

Im no lawyer nor an economist, but I do absolutely see many city bankruptcies coming in the next couple of decades.

Will these liabilities be wiped out, reduced, or transferred to some government pension guarantee entity?

I hope they will be reduced, but I believe these liabilities are written into law. this is not a business after all, but government.

no matter the outcome, rest assured it will be Bad, Bad, or bad.

And, if you think nurses are bad. you should see what some cops are making. North of 200,000. Not chiefs, or captains. Lower level guys.

so, how do you change anything, short of revolution? There is an old saying, "all politics is local". And I don't mean party politics, even though that should be reformed. But organize in your neighborhood or apartment complex or work place. Start with something small. I've seen immigrant families work to get a stop sign in their neighborhood so that their children would be safer. Then they lobbied the local school for a crossing guard and volunteered to help watch their kids going to and from school. Then they got a vacant piece of land cleaned up that was all grown up and infested with all sorts of human vermin. then they got a Cantina closed that harbored prostitutes, drunks, and drug dealers. But none of them could have done it by themselves. They worked together for the common good. That's the way you get your neighborhood changed for the better. And where do you find these neighbors? Have a meeting of a few friends in your neighborhood and ask them to tell stories of the difficulties they encounter in their neighborhood. Then get them to find like minded people to come and tell their stories. Then decide what issue is winnable and then seek out the power people (polititions, school administrators, etc.) and tell them what you want. In the beginning it should be small. This is so you can begin to build a power base of like minded people. If they don't respond or won't see you, sit in their waiting room until they will see you. And get the press there. It may take a while to get action, but if you keep working at it and don't wimp out, you'll get action. And how would it make you feel to get something done to improve your neighborhood. I know how it makes me feel--powerful knowing that there is something me and my neighbors can do. Even though I don't agree with everything the Tea Partyers have done or stand for, they organized themselves and were/are a force to be contended with. And the powers that be are scared sh..tless.

There is no changing California. Only the pacific and the San Andreas fault can solve these fiscal issues.

Cali will continue to fatten the public sector till the state slides into oblivion.

Elect me president TuCulo and I'll send Mexico the bill for baby sitting their population ;)

Barney, you should have read my post on the subject on my Blog. What you did was describe what people assume anything that is govt driven is meant to be. I laid out specific guidelines for introduction of the corps/enterprise, how they would be funded, the union wages for workers, how to pay back the borrowed taxpayer funds, and how to add to the SS fund in the process.

I am not suggesting that Govt works... I am suggesting that I WISH IT WOULD. If it followed the basic model I laid out it shouldn't be that difficult to implement.

I am suggesting that Government do something that is the equivalent of Murder to the Financial/Private Sector of this country and create Enterprise outright.

What needs to be said is that we need to stop branding this as GOVT. It should be referred to as "TAXPAYERS" or "CITIZEN ENTERPRISE"

You politely injected partisan fear-mongering

This would NOT be a "federal" Payroll.

This would be an independent NOT FOR PROFIT TAXPAYER OWNED INDEPENDENT ENTITY that would create/recreate jobs that are being shipped or outsourced overseas specifically.

These would be Small businesses OWNED by US instead of Wallstreet or any corporate Profiteering Structure. The only difference is these Entities would borrow direct from the Taxpayer/Govt and be liable for repayment in the same way all the Bailed out Banks were. With no greedy CEO and Shareholders looking to skin every cent for profit, the sole objective would be to employ American workers at Union Wages and Repay the Taxpayers, and possibly continue to function after full repayment. The only benefactor would be the Employee, and the Taxpayers, The Economy, and Relief to our federal liability to welfare, social services etc. I find it hard for anyone to rebut this idea with any solid objections. If we only used 600B, which is equal the latest round of Throwing money to the banking System that will never be loaned to small business or STIMULUS with the hope of it "trickling down" to the rest of our economy, I bet a CBO feasibility of my proposal or something close would shatter the effects of that crap stimulus by more than 10 to 1.

Don't even mention that the "Trickle down" effect of proposed stimulus is "hypothetical" at best. We have absolutely NO GUARENTEES that The Private Sector or the Economy at large will ever see a cent of that money. It is more likely that The funds will be held on the books collecting interest and shoring up Corporate Balance Sheets to Manipulate Upcoming 4th and 1st QTR earnings and guidance Reports. We have been graced with clear examples of how we gave that money to the Banking system before and they won't lend out Jack!

My proposal is form of direct Stimulus, Stimulus that would work better and faster and would actually outperform the combined first and second payoffs of the incompetent banks that litter Wallstreet.

We all know about that Public fed payrolls and pensions drain the deficit and blah blah.

You took my whole example without fully understanding the proposal I made and began naming off all the no brainer issues to the problem, without ever reading the post or responding to what I was suggesting in the first place.

Here it is again.

A Solution to the Jobs/Outsourcing Dilema

I actually had a Twitter Conversation with a gentleman that started almost something like this. Needless to say, once he figured out what I was talking about, he stopped talking. I hope you read the post Barney, I would be very interested in your response after you have read it.

Ill read it soon.

I just had to post my observations about what I see as one of this states leading issues going into the future.

When the baby boomers begin to really test the pension systems in California, and I don't mean SS, we may have some very tough decisions to make on the city and state level.

My position on immigration is probably more liberal then my above post would likely indicate.

Migrants will come to work. Is this good or bad? There presence will result In downward pressure on wages, I think. Bad for you if your competing with them. Will we all be competing with them someday? Perhaps.

I do believe that as we native born folks(descendants of immigrants of yesteryear)continue to age, we will need some people to pay taxes and what not to support us.

Those very kids of undocumented parents may well be supporting us as we enter our golden years.

No wouldn't that be funny.

We have a liberal system in California which lends towards people pushing out kids and collecting more in the way of subsidies. I see this every day on the street. Momma bear with her flock of ducklings bringing up the rear.

I always believed the best way to prevent this is to top out subsidies at no more than 2 children. This will remove a major incentive for nefarious parasites.

I know people personally who scam this way, not all are Latino. I know Latinos personally who "went north" had a child and paid 100% of all expenses and never took a dime of subsidy. This included hospitals costs as well. truly remarkable people. I know Latina's who will hold down 2 or 3 jobs while raising their children. Amazing.

I choose to consider the good with the bad and not generalize an entire country or race.

I agree on Pensions. Maybe Corporate Structureless Enterprises will alleviate that problem.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

This is not consistant with the US Constitution which prohibits American troops from internal law enforcement.

So no, it is not NEEDED or wanted.

That's a local thing and they need to keep their hands off. If I'm policed it should be by someone of my choosing and someone local. Thanks anyway though<!-/Quote-!>

I'm refering to police in "keeper of the peace internally."

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

Scarlet--so you'll build your own roads, outhouse, garbage dump, school,med school, etc. When in history has libertarianism worked? and if you put your money (who makes that?) in the bank and the bank goes under, that was your fault for not putting it under your matress, right? So, we're reduced to barter since hard assets are the only thing that can be trusted. and as for oil, we would need to eliminate the subsidies for fast depreciation, and eliminate farm subsidies and gov't flood insurance, just to name a few. And if you're a student, what about your Pell grant or student loan? Are you going to eliminate those? It all sounds third world to me.<!-/Quote-!>

When in history has libertarianism existed? Although to be clear, I don't consider myself a libertarian since I'm not hot on the whole anarchy aspect... I just believe in separation of economy and state. I see a specific role where the government is needed (as mentioned previously).

In any case, did the government build the railroads?
Does the government fund private schools?
A garbage service can be easily privately run (if they aren't already), the real cost is for the company to purchase the property and transport the garbage. Is there any reason the government is needed?
If the bank goes under, then I made a poor choice of bank, didn't I? Do banks randomly go under for no reason at all? I think I'll just need to be careful in choosing a bank.
We would not be reduced to a barter system, ever heard of gold, silver, or platinum? These are hard assets and currency both. All that is needed is for the currency to be backed by these and we're good.
For sanitation, there is something called a septic tank. When that won't do as in high-density population areas, the high-density makes the setup of sewer systems cost-effective. Why do you think it would be impossible for someone to set up a sewer system and charge people for it's use?
Also, private insurance companies exist. If someone can't afford flood insurance (or it isn't offered), maybe they shouldn't be living in a flood prone area?
My credit union offers student loans among other types.

Yes, eliminate ALL subsidies. They all involve robbing money from some and giving it to others. The role of government should not be institutionalized robbery. You're imagining that everything will automatically fail when the government is taken out of the equation. This is plainly false.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

It is against logic to say that we don't need the government to create jobs when we have not dropped below 9% national unemployment in Goawds know how long.<!-/Quote-!>

Who pays for these jobs?

At the core of the issue is: in order for the government to fund one dime of anything, it takes that dime from somebody that earned it.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

These would be Small businesses OWNED by US instead of Wallstreet or any corporate Profiteering Structure. The only difference is these Entities would borrow direct from the Taxpayer/Govt and be liable for repayment in the same way all the Bailed out Banks were. With no greedy CEO and Shareholders looking to skin every cent for profit, the sole objective would be to employ American workers at Union Wages and Repay the Taxpayers, and possibly continue to function after full repayment. The only benefactor would be the Employee, and the Taxpayers, The Economy, and Relief to our federal liability to welfare, social services etc. I find it hard for anyone to rebut this idea with any solid objections. If we only used 600B, which is equal the latest round of Throwing money to the banking System that will never be loaned to small business or STIMULUS with the hope of it "trickling down" to the rest of our economy, I bet a CBO feasibility of my proposal or something close would shatter the effects of that crap stimulus by more than 10 to 1.<!-/Quote-!>

Objection: It wouldn't make enough money to pay off its government loan because it would be staffed by the least employable 10% of labor (because if they weren't, they'd get a real job) and run by someone who couldn't turn a profit if they wanted to (because if they could, they'd be doing it).

Government corps frighten me.

Fannie, freddie...ooops. Politics----Improper lending. Big losses and debt.

GM----Government motors. I believe we are trying to get out of this "investment" now.

Post Office----oops---loss after loss after loss.


"Sound" Politics may guide operations rather than a sound profit motive.

Whenever I wonder about profit motive, and the evils of outsourcing, I look at my crotch. know what I see? My $10 American eagle jeans and beneath that my lovely boxers created with loving care by our friends in Pakistan.

Total cost....$15.

Now, if I were noble, or rich, I would buy jeans made in America.

Total Cost $100-$150.

This is a $85-%135 difference. Even in the best of times its hard to argue with that equation.

What makes the American jeans more expensive?

How come the Pakistan jeans are so much cheaper?

The corporation passed the cost of production through to us, in both cases.

Living in the developed world has indeed become more difficult over the past few decades.

We have to work harder, and become more educated just to stay even. Gone are the days of being a welder in a ship yard etc, etc, etc.

I don't know what the future is but i don't think government corps or more govt jobs is the answer.

Who will decide what these entities will produce?

"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power"


~Benito Mussolini

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."


~George Santayana

"Dude, where's my car?"


-Jesse Montgomery III

Scarlet. It Would make money the same way any other corporation makes money in the United States. I don't see %100 every product in our country imported. The profits would not be sucked up by a corporate structure that maximizes profit by way of slashing thousands of jobs. Without a corporate greed structure, money would indeed be made to pay back loans. The same way all the failed corporations have nearly payed back the loans given in the first stimulus. So far, Fannie/Freddie and the rest of the entire housing are in need of added extra money, analyst project in the area of 160B industry wide and 80B for Fannie/Freddie itself.

Solomon, not sure if you were thinking that this is a merger of state and corporate power. Actually, my idea is absent the forces that drive Wall street and usual corporate structures that dominate business. There is no figure-head, CEO, or share holder to make the sheer function of a corporation max profit and then fleecing the corporation and closing it not soon after.

Again, Barney, you keep making a "Government" and not a taxpayer issue.

Gm... we maybe "Trying" to get repaid, obviously we will. Or not this would be a major issue brought up in the discussion regarding QE2. You fail to mention FORD, and the entire host of other corporations that made money, repaid their loans, and that the government actually gained a return on most of those stimulus loans.

Now lets talk about the result of those loans and the part of stimulus that went to these private corps. What is the greater good that resulted from these loans. It kept American workers employed.

That is the point here. Our model for taxation and Government revenue, and our economy working is totally dependent on America Workers becoming Taxpaying Consumer Driven Citizens. With huge unemployment, sharp drops in consumer spending, and a failing housing market, our economy doesn't work. This hit the retail sector pretty bad, and this is why we have a stagnation in unemployment numbers. They cannot hire because they are not selling enough goods to turn a profit in order to expand employment and labor. This is also killing the housing market because people cannot stay in their homes because they either lost their jobs, or can't find one.

Everything else has been attempted to combat our recession. Throwing money here and there and everywhere. But what has worked. At the very least we know that the first stimulus that went to irresponsible and sometimes undeserving corporations actually repaid most of their loans off if not all of them. There are a FEW minor exceptions. But they don't overrule the trend that companies repaid or are capable of repaying their loans.

I also don't see any viable alternative being presented other than sitting on our hands and praying the private sector falls out of the sky and creates millions of jobs on whim. But let's be realistic and understand that the private sector will never come back any time soon becuase the banks won't lend to anyone. Even in the housing market, the government has mandated money for potential homeowners BUT, the big banks that do the bulk of mortgae transactions are underwriting their own set of credit guidelines that are more strict than the government requirements making it near impossible to obtain credit. Currently the Legislators are working to find a solution to the banks doing this. Things like this are holding up every part of our economy that needs to work. Small business loans, housing loans, consumer credit. No jobs, no new mortgages, no new customers.

What will you do. I provided a simple program that will get at the heart of some very tough issue facing America right now. Unemployment and our growing liability to entitlements against money we have to borrow to cover them. At present 42 cents of every single dollar we borrow goes directly to entitlements like social security, welfare, unemployment, and food stamp programs. At the very least, we can offer the unemployed jobs, boost consumer spending, and begin reducing the liability for all the benefits we currently give to the unemployed and the unemployed.

Solomon, building on what you said..

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

We have seen what works and what does not. We have repeated more and more of the same. We have to take a new approach to things. Over and over we have seen capitalism fail on smaller scales now and throughout recent history. The way our banking system is setup is doomed to fail, better yet, designed to fail. This scheme has been going on for more than a century now. So, yes, why not stand with me and remember all the things we have tried repeatedly and failed over and over. We are a carbon copy of the Roman Empire, a, Republic, which we have witnessed throughout history rise and fall miserably. This is why our government doesn't work, our financial system is failing us, and our Society and Status in the world is declining.

It is time to embrace new things, new solutions and ways to tackle the problems facing our country today.

I still hear no alternative that makes sense. Don't be cynical in your responses. move the conversation forward with an alternative, not provocative criticism for lack of a reasonable rebuttal.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

Scarlet. It Would make money the same way any other corporation makes money in the United States. I don't see %100 every product in our country imported. The profits would not be sucked up by a corporate structure that maximizes profit by way of slashing thousands of jobs. Without a corporate greed structure, money would indeed be made to pay back loans. The same way all the failed corporations have nearly payed back the loans given in the first stimulus. So far, Fannie/Freddie and the rest of the entire housing are in need of added extra money, analyst project in the area of 160B industry wide and 80B for Fannie/Freddie itself.<!-/Quote-!>

In your plan, I foresee that the whatever you call it will attempt and fail to make money. I'm not saying that it's impossible in theory to make money; I'm saying that in practice it will fail to make money.

Why?

1. You're staffing with the people having the most difficult time finding jobs. Don't you suppose there is some good reason why they're out of work? Either they were bad employees (but ignore this for the time being) or the company that employed them is making cheaper products by not paying union wages. In effect, you wouldn't be able to compete unless you banned private industry.

2. You will not find an entrepreneur to lead this. If it were hypothetically possible to produce a competitively priced product paying union wages at a net gain, they would be able to make even more money by not paying union wages. There would be no need of your system. If they were civic minded enough to run a company and pay union wages when they could pay less than that, they still wouldn't opt for your plan because they'd need to sacrifice their profit. You fail to realize that not just anyone can run an effective business. However, you'd have no problem finding someone to run this at a net loss.

This is straight from the progressive playbook, Cloward and Piven. Overwhelm the capitalist system with excessive taxes and regulations, and at the same time force banks to make risky mortgages while having a government entity ( Fannie Mae ) agree to buy them. Then, when the crap hits the fan, blame capitalism for the mess. Pass even more regulations on everyone but the real culprit, rinse and repeat. Spend billions on a so called stimulus, and increase debt to unsustainable levels. Pass a health care bill that will increase health care costs, but hide that by delaying benefits for 4 years and require employers to provide coverage or face fines which increase business costs. Propose carbon taxes that will greatly increase energy costs and implement through the EPA when congress rejects it. Paralyze private sector job creation by creating the most uncertain business environment possible. Throw in some irresponsible monetary policy from the fed (QE2), and cause a financial meltdown. The goal here is to replace our current system with a socialist new world order.

Oh BTW, your govt corps would lose money unless they do what the private corps do. Welcome to reality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gCwSSzFAp4 Thats all i gotta say ;)

Scarlet--Ok, so you lean towards a separation of the economy and state. Many of us would agree that gov’t is too involved with our lives. But lets look at some of the areas that you and I might disagree.

Railroads—no the gov’t didn’t build the railroads but they were instrumental in the financing and the giving of rights of way with many politicians receiving pay offs which enabled rail barrens to become wealthy at the expense of the people. But they could not have been built otherwise.
Schools—public schools are the cornerstone of economic development in America. Private schools are the purview of the rich and not the common person. And there was and is a great debate over whether the gov’t should fund private sectarian schools.
Garbage service—In Houston all businesses/apts have to use private services. Only homeowners get free garbage pickup. However, there are strict laws on what you can put in your garbage and where it can be dumped. Should that be at the discretion of the dumper. We have areas of town where illegal dumpers dump on vacant property. And what about toxic waste? Is it okay to dump that at your back door. Also, in Houston, if it were legal, because the water table is about 8’ down and the soil is not very permeable you would need at least one acre for a septic tank. For a city of four million that’s not very practical. And as for flooding, Houston has about a third of its area in the flood plain. You can have a heavy dew and you’ll have flooding. I know we’re stupid to live so close to the coast and in the flood plain, but we’re not alone.
Subsidies—I agree that there are too many subsidies. Things like child subsidies, home loan subsidies, and on and on. But as you point out, if we didn’t have taxes we wouldn’t need subsidies. And if the farmers had a bad crop one year, too bad for us. Bread might go to $20. a loaf but that’s okay too.

We could go on forever on this subject, but I’ve used up my allotment of space for this message.lol

My major point is this. In a complex society and global economy, we can’t go back to the nineteenth century and live as they did. What you describe is a third world economy, where there is little capital creation, immense poverty, which leads to lack of education, healthcare, and incentive to make things better. If that’s so good, why are people breaking down the doors of developing countries trying to get in. They are migrating to developed countries, because in spite of their faults, they see developed countries as a better alternative to what they’ve got.

There have been numerous successful gov't and private/gov't projects in American history. Two in particular were the Erie Canal and the Houston Ship Channel. in the case of the Erie Canal, it was set up by the state of New York and in the case of the Houston Ship Channel it was a public/private endeavor. In both cases the effect of creating them was to enhance the economies of the areas around those population centers. in the case of Houston, the ship channel took the city from a being a mosquito infested swamp to being the second largest port in the US. with the expansion of the Panama Canal in a few years, Houston will again be the beneficiary of public/ private development. The point being that public works or public/private partnerships have a long history of sucess for the greater good. In the process a lot of people got rich and not just because of the canals.

1. "But they could not have been built otherwise." Was this truly at the expense of the people then? I'm sure you don't think that America was better off before the railroads were built. As far as politicians receiving pay offs, this is predicated on a system where the government is entitled to dispense favors.

2. The private school I went to cost ~$4000 for the year. Contrast that with the ~$9000 per student per year the public schools receive (in my state at least). We weren't wealthy by any standard (being roughly lower middle class).

3. Toxic waste is an exception as it presents a clear danger to the lives of others. The ideal behind the whole system is to prevent the infringement of both government and individuals on the rights of others. Dumping a toxic substance in the middle of a populated area infringes on the lives of others. I'm not against basic zoning restrictions that protect the lives of individuals. Dumping garbage in the middle of a populated area or toxic waste in a water source infringe on the rights of others. The three things the government ought to protect are life, liberty, or property.

4. As far as government flood insurance, the number of people making the same decision does not change anything. If everyone decided having twenty kids was a good idea, does this make government-funded children's health insurance necessary?

5. Bread may cost that much for a season if at all. In fact, a bad harvest wouldn't necessarily lead to such spikes in price. Is there any reason to imagine a 2000% increase in price? Especially since, as you mentioned, we live in a global economy. All crops around the world will fail at the same time?

6. This won't produce a third-world economy. No third-world economy that exists has been created by capitalism. In fact, the developed world as it stands was created by capitalism, albeit not by a pure form. In any case, you point to people migrating into the developed world? I'll point to businesses moving out. What do you think the end result of this exchange will be? Do you think the wealth of the developed world was achieved through state-run economies, welfare-states, and entitlements?

Scarlet
1. The railroad barrens not only controlled the railroads, a number of them controlled the means of production to build those roads. they sold bogus stock because they could say what they wanted too, to entice envestors (like Bernie Madoff) and paid and kept politicians in power who would give them what they wanted. And they built the roads, etc. on the backs of the poor and the uneducated. as to the system being predicated on giving favors, what system does not have some of that? All systems have some who have power and some without. Who do you want to have the power? Personally, as an investor, i want to be reasonably assured that the information i'm given on my investment is reasonably accurate and that i'm not being fleeced.
2.Schools-again, public schools are the cornerstone of American success. How many schools could we build where the teachers don't get a salary (many sectarian schools use people who are called). After WWII the GI bill allowed hundreds of thousands of men and women to college. This was the source of our success in capitalism with technology and knowledge. In the past private schools were the pervue of the rich (not in your case, it sounds) but it was not about getting a job and making a contribution to society. It's tragic that many young people don't take advantage of "free" education.
3. I'm glad we agree in principle about toxic waste. There are many other issues that are in the same catagory. The issue is how much regulation is too much.
4.I'm not sure I understand your argument. The gov't backs private flood insurance. Otherwise, the cost would be prohibitive. BTW, on the Gulf Coast there are homes that still have blue roofs from Katrina,Rita, and Ike because private insurers won't pay what they owe.
5Those kinds of spikes occur all the time. This is particularly true in underdeveloped countries where roads are poor/non-existent and farmers can't get produce to market where it's needed most. Good roads would be helpful. Who will build them? Toll roads? And how will they be financed?
6. Most third world countries were created by colonial enterprises from Europe. In many cases they did little to create infrastructure or education for indigenous persons. They took but gave little back. The English seemed to do a better job of creating something but they still left little when they were finally kicked out. The result was that there was no social and economic structure and if the country didn't have a natural resource like oil, etc. they were out of luck. Even then there are few examples of where social structures and economic structures were created for the good of all.
Again, i'm not sure what your argument is in the last two sentences. please elaborate.

The point from the beginning of this thread was that participation in the process of governing ourselves has to be a part of all our responsibility. I am a capitalist. But I know that gov't has to play a role in my succuss as a capitalist. And that as a responsible person, I believe that I am responsible for ensuring your rights as long as you don't obstrust my ability to function with a certain amount of freedom. I think, in principle we both would agree on that. The problem comes when we try to discern the degree of involvement between individual rights, the economic system, and gov't. It's for us to be a part of the conversation and active in learning from history and learn what did and didn't happen.

BTW--did you vote?

+999,999 points to Parsifal for starting the most productive flame-retardant thread possibly in SC history.

A step up in forum evolution. LoL.

thank you PH.

There is a saying, "the world as it should be and the world that is". We can condemn our gov't, or corporations, oursleves or others for the way things are. My question to Scarlet about voting is one addressed to us all. If we don't vote, what reason were the sacrifices made by those who have died in wars since the revolution. I suppose one could say it was to give us the right to bitch and not vote. But i'm concerned that in the last election only 50% of those over 50 voted and less than 25% of those under 30 voted. We may not think that our vote counts, and maybe the big money has all the power. But if we don't vote, if we don't work in our communities, our churches, our schools, our unions, in the political process, etc. we've abdicated our right to gripe. I can't fix the big problems of the world, but I can mentor a young man who has no father in the picture, I can teach Sunday school in my church, I can encourage my neighbor to vote and learn the issues and history of those things affecting all our lives. The internet has opened the world as it's never been opened, but we still remain isolated in our own little world. We can't just blame the "other". The issues we face don't have simply solutions and most of them can't be fixed in a short length of time. My religious faith tells me that along with free will I have been given certain intellectual and spiritual gifts and that if I do not use them for the good of community, then they have been wasted. May the force be with you.