And where else can I get informed @wentwest? Certainly not one of the Noooz networks.
In fairyland, that would cover the labor, but it wouldnāt cover the cost of supplies. Are you going to steal those too?
I grew up in NYā¦North of Syracuse. Been living in NH since the early 80ās. Left NY when unemployment in that area was around 16%, and very very few high-tech jobs. Itās still mainly a blue-collar area with very few hi-tech jobs. Still have friends and family there (mainly around the Syracuse area).
Misappropriations of funds is still common in NY, and my relatives complain about it all the time. Many roads and bridges are in need of repairs, but NOT. Theyāve raised many service fees and taxes geared toward road work projects, and then all of a sudden the money dries up.
āGet rid of the federal tax and the highway trustā¦ā
Key words: federal, tax, highway
When I saw the discussion topic I new it would be political in nature, but itās about paying for roads (theyāre paid for with taxes and taxes are political) and concerns cars and us!
Discussion Topic: Zebra Stripes
Key words: zebra and stripes
In a discussion about zebra stripes, if I have to get rid of āstripesā from the discussion then all I have left is a stupid looking horse!
If the topic is made to be car related Zebra Stripes On Jeep Wranglers and I take out āstripesā then all I have left is a white jeep!
Hint: I donāt respond to every topic. I pick and choose. 
CSA
1 Like
Unlike someone from the west coast !
As a student of public administration, and having learned about how we form public policy in this country, I realize politics touches everything we do. When I say that, Iām not using āpoliticsā as a dirty word, because even though itās a messy system, itās the best system Iāve seen yet.
Get rid of politics, and you freeze/disable/destroy our only mechanism for forming public policy.
Many people want to forfeit some of the governments powers and give them private businesses. This has proven time and time again to be a total disaster, and many of the politicians behind it are making MILLIONS by investing or outright owning these private businesses.
2 Likes
Again I say this as a student of public administration:
If your position for or against the privatization of government functions is for or against privatization without consideration of the circumstances, your position is too rigid, and must be based on political ideology. My position on privatization is that it works well in some circumstances, but not in others. For example, when a private company handles garbage collection and recycling, that company can achieve economy of scale by serving several jurisdictions. When a local city or county handles garbage collection and recycling, they lose economy of scale. Therefore, I support the privatization of garbage collection and recycling. On the other hand, we have found that when we privatize prisons, we create a conflict of interest between the profit motive and rehabilitation. Therefore, I oppose the privatization of prisons.
In conclusion, privatization has its place, where it works well, but it has also failed where it does not work well, and knowing the difference is important for public policy.
3 Likes
The devil is in the details: privatize roads? Most would say no, but what about road construction? I donāt want the government owning blacktopping or concrete companies, do you? While living in Anchorage I knew a guy with the highway department. At that time the state did almost everything. He commented on the days and days of inactivity between jobs. Wasteful, and was stopped at one of the ābustsā.
Yeaā¦itās all private around here. But the money is dispersed through our taxes via bonds. We bid out the construction to the highest bidder. So the government is involved. I donāt want to turn over the process completely to these businesses without government oversight. I was on our town council a few years ago, and we bid out to few contractors to have some of our roads repaved. We had to go out and check and monitor their work. One company was suppose to put down 6" of asphalt but only put down 3". Too bad they couldnāt be trusted to do the job correctly.
Mike, I would like to edit a couple words in that statement. Here goesā¦
Many people want to forfeit some of private businessās powers and give them to government. This has proven time and time again to be a total disaster, and many of the politicians behind it are making MILLIONS by investing or outright owning these government positions.
There! All fixed! Thank you. I used my alternative opinions to counter your alternative facts.
CSA
Maybe we can meet in the middle. In Minnesota the state handles maintenance, snow plowing etc. but road and bridge construction is all private. It comes down to honest, budget minded people hiring honest contractors. And really there is a lot of that in Minnesota. It would be a mistake to paint all states with the type of government in NY where soda size needs to be regulated for the peopleās good. Change the leadership and things may change. As the IRS Commissioner said some years ago āif we always do what we always did, weāll always get what we always gotā. Throw the bums out if you donāt like them.
Now as far as the takers and makers, I can see where a state like South Dakota needs more money for roads than they can generate. Itās a huge state with lots of roads but only about 800,000 people to support them. Same thing in other less dense states. I donāt have a problem with that. We are a bunch of united states after all.
1 Like
You donāt have to privatize ownership of the roads in order to hire a private contractor to build those roads.
In a couple northeast states, theyāve sold their interstate highways to private companies that charge a toll. Governments are doing this because they donāt want to be bothered with the expense of maintaining those roads. One advantage of this is that the maintenance costs are taxed more efficiently because those who are using those highways are paying for their maintenance. It solves the free rider problem. One disadvantage of this is that the average maintenance costs per individual end up being higher, because they are distributed less widely.
Since I havenāt thoroughly researched the issue of privatization of interstate highways, I donāt have a position for or against it. It might be good, and it might be bad.
I hope you mean the lowest bidder.
Thatās usually someoneās job. Usually, that person whose job it is to oversee contractors is the city m
manager, the mayor, or one of their staff members.
When a government contracts services, they are still expected to oversee the contractorsā work. Theyāre not just supposed to hire a contractor and forget about it.
CSA, what if I told you that the only time the government takes over a responsibility once held by the private sector, that itās only because the private sector wasnāt able to solve a particular problem, and encountered a market failure?
Take healthcare, for example. Iād love to leave healthcare and health insurance to the private sector, but when we did, they put the profit motive ahead of peopleās health and lives. They dropped peopleās health insurance when their customers got sick, even when the sick people kept up with their health insurance premiums. They refused to sell health insurance to people who had preexisting conditions. They routinely denied legitimate claims from paying customers. All the while, our Republican White House and Republican Congress refused to do anything about these issues. Iād call that a market failure, and Iād say the time to end the private sector healthcare experiment has long since passed.
Now, please donāt get me wrong. Iām no socialist. I believe the free markets are best at providing other things, things like consumer goods, things like cars and clothing, but many of us have learned that healthcare and the profit motive are incompatible due to the inherent conflict of interest. Trying to reconcile the profit motive with patient welfare leads to unnecessary and premature deaths.
3 Likes
_[quote=āWhitey, post:77, topic:101064ā]
They refused to sell health insurance to people who had preexisting conditions.
[/quote]
Thereās a problem with āinsuringā peopleās health, people who have preexisting conditions, that is. I believe thatās why it wasnāt done prior to ACA and why it rapidly failed under ACA.
The problem? Thatās not insurance.
My homeownerās insurance company couldnāt stay in business if people waited for a disaster to actually hit before buying coverage, likewise with FEMAās flood insurance program. Both are preexisting conditions.
Neither entity will sell a policy to cover preexisting conditions. Try shopping for car collision insurance to get your car repaired AFTER you wreck it. Iām glad you canāt because my insurance would cost too much.
I donāt have the answer to that problem other than to be smart enough to know it canāt work. We were doing OK with Medicaid and Medicare.
ACA indicated that for it to work, everybody would have to get āinsuranceā or insurance or pay a fine. Sick people jumped at the bargain and bought. Healthy young people and people who couldnāt afford it took a penalty (although donāt pay if they get no tax refund). Insurers were going broke, quit offering ACA policies and charged paying customers more and cut their benefits. Disaster.
Too many are riding in the wagon and too few are pulling it. Some people need our help. Iām afraid we have too many that have chosen not to help themselves and we enable it. (Think 1 in 6 on food assistance).The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peopleās money!
You do realize that with ACA there are still tens of millions without coverage and millions have lost coverage?
CSA
1 Like
My home owners insurance pays for a disaster, not for painting my house or mowing my lawn. My car insurance pays for accident damage and liability, not oil changes. From a math standpoint, ACA was doomed to fail and the real reason for it was to foster in a single payer government system. There does need to be a system for catastrophic conditions though. A friend had a bill for over $2 million, paid by insurance. No company can stay in business with expenses like that. All that kept people happy was the government (us) paying the premiums for lower income people. Others had astronomical premiums and astronomical co-pays. A trojan horse my friends, nothing to do with private clinics and hospitals or insurance companies.
Back to roads. I have to admit ignorance but an article in todays paper talked about the road and bridge projects being planned this year. Due to a 1/2 % sales tax levy to go for county roads and bridges, they will now be able to keep up with the infrastructure projects needed. I really didnāt know or forgot they ever increased the local sales tax but it certainly has been a painless way to pay for the roads. A supplement, not all the money. Still get money from local taxes, and state and federal, but hey raise it 2% if that will do the trick.
Alternate facts is your deal cca. You and trump get your facts from those spying microwave cameras.
2 Likes
Oh, so you found out about our cameras? Oops!
Mike, cca = cold cranking amps (car battery jargon).
I donāt think that was an alternative fact, just a mistake.
CSA = common sense answer (clever response jargon)