Build Roads, Save the World

[James972]

Good luck in all your future endeavors.

notice it is always the liberal who is defeated in debate and must withdraw.

iberals want to employ people repaving roads while conservatives want to employ them inventing, making, servicing and selling Iphones!! See the vast difference in intelligence between liberals and conservatives?

 

[imagep]

liberals want to employ people repaving roads while conservatives want to employ them inventing, making, servicing and selling Iphones!! See the vast difference in intelligence between liberals and conservatives?

Liberals and conservatives both want to employ people paving roads and selling iphones. To suggest anything else is ludicrous, inaccurate, and pretty much pointless.

 

[James972]

Liberals and conservatives both want to employ people paving roads and selling iphones. To suggest anything else is ludicrous, inaccurate, and pretty much pointless.

wrong, liberals actually believe tax and spend on infrastructure can save the world as per OP. Make Sense?

 

[imagep]

wrong, liberals actually believe tax and spend on infrastructure can save the world as per OP. Make Sense?

I understand that, and people who believe that we should have infrastructuer are correct, regardless of if they are liberals or not. So what does that have to do with iphones? We can have both infrastructure AND iphones, they are in no way mutually exclusive.

 

[James972]

We can have both infrastructure AND iphones, they are in no way mutually exclusive.

wrong of course . When liberals tax away dollars to "stimulate" the economy with bridges to nowhere they destimulate our ability to invent and purchase new technology!

you've only been told that 10001 times and yet you ask for it over and over again like the drunk repeatedly walking into the swinging door. What don't you anticipate the answer? Is it because a liberal cant learn? Isn't that really why the debate never ends?

 

[imagep]

wrong of course . When liberals tax away dollars to "stimulate" the economy with bridges to nowhere they destimulate our ability to invent and purchase new technology!

you've only been told that 10001 times and yet you ask for it over and over again like the drunk repeatedly walking into the swinging door. What don't you anticipate the answer? Is it because a liberal cant learn? Isn't that really why the debate never ends?

Yet the government doesn't have to tax away more money to spend more. Our government issues the US dollar. Where do you think the US Dollar comes from, China?

 

[James972]

Yet the government doesn't have to tax away more money to spend more.

true, it can borrow but that is identical situation in that lib soviet govt bureaucrats are spending and not the person who lent the money. 1+1=2 and the swinging door hits the liberal in the head for the 10002nd time. Why not write answer down so you wont ask same question for 10003rd time tomorrow? Seriously????

 

[imagep]

true, it can borrow but that is identical situation in that lib soviet govt bureaucrats are spending and not the person who lent the money. 1+1=2 and the swinging door hits the liberal in the head for the 10002nd time. Why not write answer down so you wont ask same question for 10003rd time tomorrow? Seriously????

The US goverment has been issuing dollars for a long time, I don't know what that has to do with "lib ggovt bureaucrats". I didn't say anything about borrowing. And technically, the US government doesn't borrow.

 

[James972]

The US goverment has been issuing dollars for a long time, I don't know what that has to do with "lib ggovt bureaucrats". I didn't say anything about borrowing. And technically, the US government doesn't borrow.

what?????????

 

[imagep]

what?????????

That's what I'm wondering. You ramble on about " lib soviet govt bureaucrats are spending and not the person who lent the money"

I can only guess at what that means.

 

[James972]

That's what I'm wondering. You ramble on about " lib soviet govt bureaucrats are spending and not the person who lent the money"

when libsoviet bureaucrats tax and spend other peoples money they waste it, they cause malinvestment, and recession. When taxpayers spend their own hard earned money they improve their standard of living and stimulate the economy in a sustainable way..

 

[imagep]

when libsoviet bureaucrats tax and spend other peoples money they waste it, they cause malinvestment, and recession. When taxpayers spend their own hard earned money they improve their standard of living and stimulate the economy in a sustainable way..

A lot of times you are right, and I'm certainly not a high tax guy, I actually thing that most people shouldn't have to pay taxes at all, except for maybe where we can directly link them to the public sector good or service that they are using (like a fee for a drivers licenses, or gas tax to pay for roads, etc.

However, there are certainly some things that we are better off doing in the aggregate, such as having a military, law enforcement, and public education. Do you think we would be better off if everyone had to hire their own police force? And should we not take care of those who can't take care of themselves (like the exceptionally disabled)?

 

[James972]

Do you think we would be better off if everyone had to hire their own police force?

yes!!! and we do!!! 95% of the policeman in the country are local!!! If scummy liberals had their way they would be national and so able to take over the country with one order from Washington!!

 

[James972]

And should we not take care of those who can't take care of themselves (like the exceptionally disabled)?

Asked and answered 5 million times but a liberal is not capable of learning so for the 5,000,001st time. Yes, but such care should be state/local so there is competition on price and quality. Please print and post on fridge for daily review.

 

[James972]

You ramble on about " lib soviet govt bureaucrats are spending and not the person who lent the money"

I can only guess at what that means.

govt spending versus private spending!!!!

 

[imagep]

yes!!! and we do!!! 95% of the policeman in the country are local!!! If scummy liberals had their way they would be national and so able to take over the country with one order from Washington!!

Local, but still paid for by government. Government is fungible, it doesn't particularly matter what level of government provides what services.

 

[imagep]

Asked and answered 5 million times but a liberal is not capable of learning so for the 5,000,001st time. Yes, but such care should be state/local so there is competition on price and quality. Please print and post on fridge for daily review.

Why would there be more price competition for care providers on a local level than the federal level?

 

[James972]

Why would there be more price competition for care providers on a local level than the federal level?

OMG!!! asked and answered 1000 times!!!!! Ok for 1001st, when you have a federal monopoly you get less price and quality competition than when you have 100's of local, state, and regional competitors.

Please post on fridge so you won't be asking same questions all your life.

 

[imagep]

OMG!!! asked and answered 1000 times!!!!! Ok for 1001st, when you have a federal monopoly you get less price and quality competition than when you have 100's of local, state, and regional competitors.

Please post on fridge so you won't be asking same questions all your life.

You are assuming that the federal government would set the price, rather than the vendors setting the price. That may or may not be a valid assumption, it just depends on the system.

Occasionally I bid on government contracts. I've never been told by the government (any level of it) how much the price will be, I've always had to do the pricing, and then see if the government finds that acceptable. Usually, if I bid too high, the contract goes to a lower priced competitor. It doesn't particularly matter if the government contract is federal or state or local. If anything, bids for federal contracts may tend to be lower since they would tend to be larger contracts.