The Ghey Is Spreading

[Rod Farva]

Guilt might not be the right word. Maybe responsibility.

I think it is incorrect to think we should just ignore responsibility for past actions as a society (especially recent) using the guise of "that past is the past" or "I didn't do that so why should I care".

We know our society had some forms of discrimination and social biases against groups/minorities. I don't think it's a bad trait of society to try and correct some of those injustices. Do we go overboard sometimes? Absolutely. The pendulum often swings a bit too far. I mean, I think some of the handicap rules are just a huge waste of money. Being in construction, I have seen the ADA standards for sidewalk handicap ramps change numerous times in the past 2 decades and governments spend millions of dollars going around and changing out perfectly fine concrete ramps and replace them with completely overkill designs that cost way too much money.

Another example in construction is the recent changes to sediment and erosion control, which can add $10,000 easy to every house built (people don't even realize they're spending it on this). And the problem is it would cost $1000.00 a house to prevent 90% of sediment/erosion loss but the Natural Resource fools are obsessed with it so much they spend 90% of the money chasing the last 10% of effectiveness (and meanwhile farms are completely exempt from sediment and erosion controls). Remember we are talking about TEMPORARY construction expenses. We put all this money into jobs just to tear it all out at the end.

Those are just two examples of how the system works incorrectly. I'm all for spending that first 10% to 50% of money on a "cause" of restitution for past inaction in some degree. But there are always those that want to take advantage of the system and push the cost way, way up looking to correct every last nook and cranny of the problem, even those when the cost benefit analysis is ludicrously unbalanced and wasteful.

That's why some social injustice issues I have no problem with. Giving gays the right to marry? Who the **** cares. That doesn't cost us anything. Reasonable social welfare that can help the most common 90% of problems? I'll listen. Making social programs that cost 50% of the money trying to help the last 10% of problems? No way. We can't protect everyone from themselves. Sometimes we have to acknowledge that not all people can be saved. Give people reasonable chances to get out of poverty or a cycle of problems. REASONABLE being the defining word.

While I vehemently disagree with the idea of restitution for past societal ills I agree with most of the rest of what you say here. And guess what the common denominator is in all the cost overruns and bloated budgets and wasteful spending you cite? Hint; It's the government. But you sill want them to decide who gets what as reparations or restitutions?

 

[deljzc]

Someone has to decide.

Ideally, many social programs should be run by the states. I think the federal government taxes too much and the state governments tax too little.

States have a lot of expenses. If we want education, safety-net entitlements, some sort of mandatory health care system, road/street/sewer/infrastructure maintenance and many other programs on this level why is the federal government getting 5 dollars for every 1 dollar the state gets?

It would take major reanalysis of how our government works and we need to go back to "United States". Not "America".

In some ways the first safety net should be state governments, then the federal government should be a safety net for states that are screwing it up.

 

[Turd Ferguson]

Glamour magazine named Caitlyn Jenner "woman of the year" which finally proves without question that men really are better than women.

 

[Rod Farva]

Someone has to decide.

Ideally, many social programs should be run by the states. I think the federal government taxes too much and the state governments tax too little.

States have a lot of expenses. If we want education, safety-net entitlements, some sort of mandatory health care system, road/street/sewer/infrastructure maintenance and many other programs on this level why is the federal government getting 5 dollars for every 1 dollar the state gets?

It would take major reanalysis of how our government works and we need to go back to "United States". Not "America".

In some ways the first safety net should be state governments, then the federal government should be a safety net for states that are screwing it up.

No one "has to decide" anything other than "no" if you are still talking about reparations or restitutions.


Wildly disagree on the "state's tax too little" comment. Are you in Pa.? We still pay an excise tax on liquor that was put in place as recovery assistance for the Johnstown flood. Toll booths are a permanent fixture on a long ago built and paid for piece of **** turnpike. And who said I want any kind of "mandatory health care system"?

I do agree that the federal government has become to pervasive and that the states should have the jurisdiction over them in many matters. But that does not mean I favor a bigger state government either.

 

[deljzc]

I live in Delaware. My income tax is 6.6%. We have no sales tax.

Pennsylvania is hugely antiquated on it's income tax rate, which is a flat tax of 3% (it should never be flat). If Pennsylvania just went to a sliding scale it would help them out a lot. Sales tax in Pennsylvania is 6% (8% in Philly). Pennsylvania is a lot more expensive per capita to maintain than Delaware. Bigger state, more roads, etc.

Here is what the federal government get's and where.

http://www.cbpp.org/research/policy-basics-where-do-federal-tax-revenues-come-from

The really interesting thing about this graph is that income tax on personal income has been one the most steady sources of income by the federal government. It rarely ever varies from 40-45% of total income. For all the stupid political BS about how cutting taxes on income is going to do so much, there's very little effect on anything.

It's been how federal governments have done corporate taxes and payroll taxes that have changed so much over the years. And out continues relaxation of estate, excise, and other taxes (that used to be 20% of our government's income after WWII - one of the greatest growth times ever - and now is only 9%).

The graph also shows the incredible welfare/entitlement boom between 1960 and 1980 and how the government decided to use payroll taxes to pay for it.

 

[ark steel]

which is a flat tax of 3% (it should never be flat).

Why? I think it should be, exactly, that. Flat that is, not 3%.