Let me make sure I am understanding this thread. Our over-reaching, central planning federal government has totally mishandled the taxpayers money, and not properly taken care of crumbling roads and bridges, correct? So.........our resident BGP leftists, leftist cheerleaders, leftist apologists, and gullibles want the taxpayers to give MORE money to be mishandled? :banghead::no:

For a guy who wants to paint himself as enlightened you struggle with this topic. It's quite amusing.

Instead of your snippy putdowns and condescending Econ 101 lectures, try answering the question: What does "the people's money" mean in real terms? Does your definition disqualify federal funds from being used in certain ways? Be specific.

Might this tax have more to do with climate change and controlling carbon emissions than actually improving infrastructure?

 

 

FarBeyond, please...Republicans are as big of wasters of the PEOPLES' money as democrats. Difference generally is democrats spend it here while Repubs pour it out in a desert somewhere.

Edited February 11, 201610 yr by Hellcats

Instead of your snippy putdowns and condescending Econ 101 lectures, try answering the question: What does "the people's money" mean in real terms? Does your definition disqualify federal funds from being used in certain ways? Be specific.

 

No? If the expenditure is legally passed obviously the government can use it how they see fit at that point regardless if I find certain spending unhealthy . But the government doesn't have an inherent right to all our income. When we legally keep more of our own income that isn't welfare.

 

But you are straying from the reason I brought up the point. You called it corporate welfare. Welfare isn't when people or organzations keep more of their own money. If they legally use the laws of the land to keep more of their money the government has no right to that money. It isn't the governments money .

 

I don't know if I can break it down in a more simple fashion.

That view is not at all the founding view and has been popularized by the great communists of history.

 

Ever wonder why so many roads have the name 'pike' in them? A priviate person or group built it and got paid via the toll measured at the 'turn-pike'.

 

Ever wonder why other roads have the 'Mill' as part of them. That is because they were road to Bowmans Mill or Parkers Mill. Who built those roads - the mill owner.

 

So the commonwealth is nothing more than another name for forced wealth redistribution in the eyes of the UIs. Seems that fits.

 

When the State government levis taxes for local 'commonwealth' projects its usually not bad and is good intent and would match the narrative.

 

But when a centralized overarching government does so its usually for forced control of the States and forces States and the local people to capitulate to the Tiny Dot as above. Totalitarianism heads are not always a single guy in a made-up military uniform. It can be 565 or so men and women in nice suites who meet in a marble building.

The interstate highway system has been a huge plus for America. So was the Erie Canal project in the early 19th century. Both were transportation projects whose scope demanded public financing. No commies involved in either.

The interstate highway system has been a huge plus for America. So was the Erie Canal project in the early 19th century. Both were transportation projects whose scope demanded public financing. No commies involved in either.

 

The problem is we put sufficient funding mechanisms in place to support infrastructure and our government misuses the funds. Also since the time of those project government has only grown larger increasing departments and staff. Which leads to higher liability. The government lost focus on one of its main jobs the up keep of our nation's infrastructure .

 

Why should we ad a society give more money to an organzation who can't manage the money we already give them.

The problem is we put sufficient funding mechanisms in place to support infrastructure and our government misuses the funds. Also since the time of those project government has only grown larger increasing departments and staff. Which leads to higher liability. The government lost focus on one of its main jobs the up keep of our nation's infrastructure .

 

Why should we ad a society give more money to an organzation who can't manage the money we already give them.

 

Not sure if I've ever liked anything you have said LB, but I have not lost mind. :jump:

 

It doesn't matter which party is in power for some reason the funding does not make it to improving our infrastructure as it should.

Let me make sure I am understanding this thread. Our over-reaching, central planning federal government has totally mishandled the taxpayers money, and not properly taken care of crumbling roads and bridges, correct? So.........our resident BGP leftists, leftist cheerleaders, leftist apologists, and gullibles want the taxpayers to give MORE money to be mishandled? :banghead::no:

 

Sure. That's the MO. Infrastructure, welfare, education. Go ahead and waste it, there's always more to get from those people giving half their income but who still aren't giving their fair share.

Since WW2 when did the USA have it's healthiest economic outlook?

Sure. That's the MO. Infrastructure, welfare, education. Go ahead and waste it, there's always more to get from those people giving half their income but who still aren't giving their fair share.

If you want to talk about waste and corruption, look no further than the U.S. military.

If you want to talk about waste and corruption' date=' look no further than the U.S. military.[/quote']

 

As an anti gun, you should tread carefully calling out the brave souls who protect your way of life.

If you want to talk about waste and corruption, look no further than the U.S. military.

 

I agree that waste and corruption in spending our money is everywhere, including the military. All the more reason not to give them more to waste.

As an anti gun, you should tread carefully calling out the brave souls who protect your way of life.

Sorry, Charlie. This has nothing to do with the brave young men and women who are in harm's way. I would argue that they're underpaid. Nor does this have anything to do with gun control. I'm talking about the people who make millions as private contractors and the military establishment that enables these rip-offs.

Sorry' date=' Charlie. This has nothing to do with the brave young men and women who are in harm's way. I would argue that they're underpaid. Nor does this have anything to do with gun control. I'm talking about the people who make millions as private contractors and the military establishment that enables these rip-offs.[/quote']

 

Contractors have been used for 100 years and will always be used.

Contractors have been used for 100 years and will always be used.

That's a real crackerjack defense.