Five Gov't Programs That Are Successful

[cclaxton]

1) Protecting the Nation against Financial Bankruptcy: Gov't financial policies that prevent Financial Depressions and stimulate the economy. Where do people look when the economy is tanking or there is widespread fraud?....THe Feds.
2) Public Health Programs: The CDC and NIH have literally saved the lives of the nation through innoculation programs, health research, establishing health care provider protocols to protect health care workers in hospitals, and nutrition. Also, standards for doctors and nurses and medical technologies.
3) Social Security: Support for the Elderly, for families that lose their primary caregivers, and for the disabled have been wildly successful programs. While it needs to be adjusted along the way, it is one of the most successful Federal programs ever.
4) The Interstate Highway System: Funding and establishing standards and improving highway technologies have made our highways hugely successful.
5) Consumer Protection: The FDA has done an outstanding job of testing pharmaceuticals, and establishing standards for food handling and distribution and testing. Requirements for seat belts and air bags and other safety enhancements have saved millions of lives.

There are many more, but these are the ones I would say are the top 5. And, that doesn't even include the successful military programs.
Are there problems with the above programs?...Sure, but the problems are minor compared to the major achievements and the big picture. Whenever you have a big enterprise, there are going to be problems...every company in American has them, too.

It's important to separate the POLITICAL differences we have over these programs from whether the gov't is successful at operating them. Very often partisans like to claim a particular program is horrible and exaggerate their problems because they have a political difference over whether the program should exist. If you don't agree with a particular program, that is perfectly fine, but don't trash the gov't program just because you disagree with it philosophically.

Cody

[JV_]

Social Security is successful? It's about to go bankrupt. SSDI is probably one of the most abused federal programs in history.

I don't even know why I'm replying, I already know you and I disagree on just about everything related to politics.


If you don't agree with a particular program, that is perfectly fine, but don't trash the gov't program just because you disagree with it philosophically.Just like the IDPA thread, please stop telling me what I can and can't do. If I disagree with it on philosophy, I am free to "trash it" because I may feel it's a waste of my money.

Let's make this a "kitchen sink for all liberal causes" thread. We need:

Universal Healthcare For All
A Living Wage



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjPTdJ2auj0

[NETim]

1) Protecting the Nation against Financial Bankruptcy: Gov't financial policies that prevent Financial Depressions and stimulate the economy. Where do people look when the economy is tanking or there is widespread fraud?....THe Feds.
2) Public Health Programs: The CDC and NIH have literally saved the lives of the nation through innoculation programs, health research, establishing health care provider protocols to protect health care workers in hospitals, and nutrition. Also, standards for doctors and nurses and medical technologies.
3) Social Security: Support for the Elderly, for families that lose their primary caregivers, and for the disabled have been wildly successful programs. While it needs to be adjusted along the way, it is one of the most successful Federal programs ever.
4) The Interstate Highway System: Funding and establishing standards and improving highway technologies have made our highways hugely successful.
5) Consumer Protection: The FDA has done an outstanding job of testing pharmaceuticals, and establishing standards for food handling and distribution and testing. Requirements for seat belts and air bags and other safety enhancements have saved millions of lives.

There are many more, but these are the ones I would say are the top 5. And, that doesn't even include the successful military programs.
Are there problems with the above programs?...Sure, but the problems are minor compared to the major achievements and the big picture. Whenever you have a big enterprise, there are going to be problems...every company in American has them, too.

It's important to separate the POLITICAL differences we have over these programs from whether the gov't is successful at operating them. Very often partisans like to claim a particular program is horrible and exaggerate their problems because they have a political difference over whether the program should exist. If you don't agree with a particular program, that is perfectly fine, but don't trash the gov't program just because you disagree with it philosophically.

Cody

The problem is, when a private concern is operated inefficiently, they go belly up (unless of course they're in tight with the current Admin and they get bailed out with taxpayer funds), while public entities simply get more and more taxpayer dollars. Inefficiency be damned as long as the program in question buys votes and entrenches political power. There is little incentive to operate sensibly or efficiently.

Federal banking policies have taken the risks of investments away from the banks and other financial institutions and placed the burden on US taxpayers. The banks are free to operate, for the most part, with greatly reduced risk but still make money with sometimes unsound investment policies. (And let's not forget all the bad mortgage loans they made at the point of the Fed's guns to unqualified folks, which was a factor in the 2008 meltdown.)

Not to say they, the Feds, haven't had their successes. But supposedly their power is restricted by the Constitution (which obviously was forgotten long ago) and now it seems they have their fingers into everything.

I don't think it's a good idea and I am not comfortable with it, legally or philosophically.

"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have." -- Gerald Ford,
Presidential address to a joint session of Congress (12 August 1974)

[Guinnessman]

Here is a book that will open some eyes: http://www.amazon.com/The-Real-Crash-Americas-Bankruptcy/dp/1250046564/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1403699147&sr=8-1&keywords=the+real+crash

For those of you with your heads in the sand, this book is a good start.

[RoyGBiv]

I LOL'd when I read the first one.!! I'm still LOL-ing.

Yeah.... Let me go set fire to this house next door, so that I can run in, throw a grenade to put it out, kill half the occupants and take credit for saving some of the structure.

LOL!

[JAD]

Equality for life
Honor thy Crèche and thy Kibbutz, that thou mayest be longlived upon the housing unit that thy State will give thee.
"Gee -" said Hazel. "I could tell that one was a doozy."
Amen. And all that cal.

[orionz06]

If you don't agree with a particular program, that is perfectly fine, but don't trash the gov't program just because you disagree with it philosophically.


I will trash the government because it deserves my trashing, just like IDPA, the TSA, the ATF, and police who shoot pets. Not sure why it is so damned hard for that to sink on for you...

[BaiHu]

1) Protecting the Nation against Financial Bankruptcy: Gov't financial policies that prevent Financial Depressions and stimulate the economy....
2) Public Health Programs: The CDC and NIH have literally saved the lives of the nation through innoculation programs, health research, establishing health care provider protocols to protect health care workers in hospitals, and nutrition. Also, standards for doctors and nurses and medical technologies.
3) Social Security: Support for the Elderly, for families that lose their primary caregivers, and for the disabled have been wildly successful programs. While it needs to be adjusted along the way, it is one of the most successful Federal programs ever.
4) The Interstate Highway System: Funding and establishing standards and improving highway technologies have made our highways hugely successful.
5) Consumer Protection: The FDA has done an outstanding job of testing pharmaceuticals, and establishing standards for food handling and distribution and testing. Requirements for seat belts and air bags and other safety enhancements have saved millions of lives.....

I'll play, but mainly because this enraged me a bit.

1) Without the policies of a government gone wild (GGW), the banks would never have taken the risks, the realtors would have never have taken the risks and we never would've had the liar loans that were then creatively covered/insured by Wall St, sold back to main street as BS triple A paper, accumulated by mom, pop and one of the largest pension holders, CALPERS. Yah, nice work watching porn while the financial world burned SEC. Once all the infection hit the majority of the nation and then spread to the rest of the world, yes, the government "saved" us by taxing us to death as well as 7 future generations in order to stop the monster they created. Meanwhile, stripping away the only intelligent thing people should do at this time, which is "save" money, because the interest rate is set to zero, because if it was any higher the government wouldn't be able to serve it's self-created debt bubble even though it's stealing it from 8 generations of workers.

2) Mayo Clinic.

3) What JV said.

4) Meh! The roadway system started out privately by wealthy business owners IIRC and then the government took it over. Rightly so, maybe, but I haven't seen any toll come down in NJ that was intended to be up "just to pay off" the roads and bridges that the tax payers already paid for. The government is the only "vendor" I know of where people defend their right to charge citizens two or more times for something you could've a) provided for yourself, "locally and privately" or b) didn't need/want in the first place.

5) Consumer protection? More like a racket that skims off the top and indirectly creates a "if it didn't work for that, then can we use it for this" pay to play system; under the guise of saving the world from evil big Pharma. Testing is what scientists do, but when it costs half a billion of graft to run it through the FDA, what do you think is going to happen? Canadian generics anyone? You reduce ingenuity by small players and create "massaged" data by major players who can afford to play.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

[TCinVA]

Sure, but the problems are minor

I wouldn't call public programs that have promised trillions of dollars more in benefits than there is revenue to fund them to be a "minor" problem.

You seem to confuse thinking something to be true with something actually being true. Merely stating that X has been "wildly successful" does not make it so. Take the Great Society public welfare programs...their stated intention when passed was to remove people from dependence on a government check. Not according to me, according to the people who wrote and passed the legislation. The goal was to remove people from dependence. They have done precisely the opposite.

That does not make them "wildly successful", it makes them an abject failure. The VA program was held to be pretty awesome to! Right up until the point where we found out they were killing people by denying them care.

What you did was just list 5 articles of your personal faith that are not falsifiable. You posted a catechism, not an argument. You're approaching social problems of massive import the same way people approached Oral Roberts looking for a cure for cancer. If you just believe hard enough and give 'em enough money...

[Dropkick]

I will trash the government because it deserves my trashing, just like IDPA, the TSA, the ATF, and police who shoot pets. Not sure why it is so damned hard for that to sink on for you...

You forgot Taurus and Kimber Pepper Gat.

[LittleLebowski]

That which governs best governs least.

[RoyGBiv]

I LOL'd when I read the first one.!! I'm still LOL-ing.

Yeah.... Let me go set fire to this house next door, so that I can run in, throw a grenade to put it out, kill half the occupants and take credit for saving some of the structure.

LOL!

Right on cue...
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28012760

and... http://www.foxbusiness.com/economy-policy/2014/06/25/us-economy-shrinks-by-most-since-great-recession/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxbusiness%2Flatest+%28Inter nal+-+Latest+News+-+Text%29


The Commerce Department said on Wednesday gross domestic product fell at a 2.9 percent annual rate, the economy's worst performance in five years, instead of the 1.0 percent pace it had reported last month.

While the economy's woes have been largely blamed on an unusually cold winter, the magnitude of the revisions suggest other factors at play beyond the weather. Growth has now been revised down by a total of 3.0 percentage points since the government's first estimate was published in April, which had the economy expanding at a 0.1 percent rate.

The difference between the second and third estimates was the largest on records going back to 1976, the Commerce Department said.

"Government MANAGEMENT of the economy"...... http://texaschlforum.com/images/smilies/rlol.gif http://texaschlforum.com/images/smilies/rlol.gif http://texaschlforum.com/images/smilies/rlol.gif

[Chuck Whitlock]

I may not know what I am talking about, but I will grant you that, in it's original form and not how it is being administered now, Social Security may have been successful, IF Congress hadn't continually stolen from the fund. But that just shows that the .gov can't touch anything without screwing it up.

[cclaxton]

Just like the IDPA thread, please stop telling me what I can and can't do. If I disagree with it on philosophy, I am free to "trash it" because I may feel it's a waste of my money.
JV, I should have chosen a different way of saying that. I am not trying to tell people what they can and can't do. I just have a way of saying things and it was not intentional. I should have said "...but I think it's unfair to trash a gov't program just because you disagree with it politically."
Communication is the hardest thing we do as humans, IMHO. I apologize if it upset anyone.
Cody

[RevolverRob]

1) - There is no such thing as national bankruptcy, in a place where free market economy exists - That is not a real thing. GM could have failed as easily as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

2) NIH and CDC only conduct research at institutions in conjunction with major research institutions. For the most part, NIH provides research funding to scientists, who are NOT government employees and then NIH and CDC ask those scientists to release their results and everyone gives those agencies the credit for the work, as opposed to the scientists that actually did it. The Government is good at taking credit for things it doesn't do...But when you take NIH money you know this is happening. I have personally work on NIH-funded grants. This is how this system works.

3) A system that is financially bankrupt that I pay into every month where I will not see a dime of it returned. I'm going to sound like a jerk here but...Social Security is a not a retirement program. A whole generation of people treated it like that, because the government lied to them, and the end result is a poorly managed fund which citizens who are currently paying into will never get their money back from it.

4) The interstate highway system - Built by STATES using Federal dollars - and paid for courtesy of corruption and political votes. And this is arguably the most successful of the ventures you listed.

5) The FDA only performs small amounts of testing. Instead, they require patent/copyright holders to submit their product for testing to a review panel that is approved by the FDA. They then use those results to determine the safety of a product. The standards were developed by private doctors and health professionals and provided to the FDA, not the other way around.

-Rob

[RoyGBiv]

That which governs best governs least.
I'd heard this quote before, but was struggling with the wording...

Clarification: That government is best which governs least. (http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/government-best-which-governs-least-quotation)

BTW... http://texaschlforum.com/images/smilies/iagree.gif 1,000,000%

[JV_]

I should have said "...but I think it's unfair to trash a gov't program just because you disagree with it politically."Gotcha. But I still disagree with the reworded statement.

[NETim]

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C.S. Lewis

[SecondsCount]

The problem is the belief in government, like it is some kind of wonderful being that is there to make everything better. This is very dangerous. LL touched on this with his simple post.

You can get into the political side of it but the reality is that we don't really know the people that we vote for, whether they have a D or an R in front of their name. The huge amount of money that they take out of my paycheck each year to pay for their pet programs is staggering and they don't have much to show for it.

How is it that there are states with more people on welfare than are earning a living? That is one that boggles my mind.

[Corvus]

Gov't had plans to rape Social Security and screw the people the day it was passed. The gov't retained ownership of accounts and set the age to retire about 4 years past life expectancy.

[TAZ]

1) the government has no place protecting the finances of private industry. The argument has been made and IMO it's incredibly accurate that the government intervention in the financial markets over the years actually enables risky behavior in the financial sector. The too big to fail and therefore can take crazy Enronomics risks cause the tax payer will bail me out mentality is NOT good for the financial security of a nation. IMO the federal intervention creates a more debt laden country in the form of a higher tax burden used to pay for the bail outs. Couple that with the Fed Reserve the government really hasn't helped us financially.

2) no personal experience so I can't comment. Unsure if the credit for immunizations and such goes there but till I know other wise they can have it. However, due to the recent political leaning associated with a supposedly scientific community I'll only give them half credit.

3) SSA is a scam. It's a legal ponzi scheme that steals from future generations to pay for the needs of the current one. Kind of like running up CC debt to fund your life style. Generally not viewed as a good thing for ones financial health. Had it been implemented as a government managed 401k or IRA program it might have worked. SS is one of the reasons why our kids are born as debtors. The minute they pop out they owe for your benefits. NOT a good idea in my book.

4) states had roads before, but the HWY system did improve transportation and access across the country. I do wonder why states have to pay into maintaining the federal system. If it's a federal system shouldn't the Feds be doing the work to maintain them? I vote a solid plus on this.

5) FDA- aren't these the same guys who pushed high carb diets for decades with their goofy pyramid? How about high fructose corn syrup in everything you eat?? As has been notes the whole drug testing thing is pretty much a farce. So I'll go with a 25% positive.

1.75 out of 5 according to my score sheet. That's a 35% success rate. Thanks but I want my money back. If your car only started 2.5 days a week I'm pretty sure you'd think you got a lemon.

[JV_]

4) states had roads before, but the HWY system did improve transportation and access across the country. I do wonder why states have to pay into maintaining the federal system. If it's a federal system shouldn't the Feds be doing the work to maintain them? I vote a solid plus on this.

Don't forget that federal highway funds are often held over states to make them do things that the federal government wants, like change their drinking ages or have altered requirements for issuing drivers licenses. This has implications for state sovereignty, it borders on extortion.

[David S.]

nevermind

[Josh Runkle]

I should have said "...but I think it's unfair to trash a gov't program just because you disagree with it politically."

I am politically against social security. It is a failure of a system. If my neighbors bought a house they couldn't afford and new vehicles they couldn't afford and were about to go bankrupt, I wouldn't call them successful. In the same manner, I won't sit around and look at social security's absolute failure of a system and say, "but it's helped some people."

I am politically against gun control. I will be politically against any future government programs that include gun control.

Where do you get off saying that people can't disagree with something politically if someone else likes it?

Are you allowed to have your voice, but I am not allowed to have mine?

So, if we lived in Nazi Germany, I couldn't politically oppose government programs because the Nazis had amazing social welfare (aside from murdering non-Aryans)?

Seriously, where do you get off making the rules that people can't politically oppose government programs?

Your viewpoint deeply offends me.

[Stengun]

Howdy NETim,



The problem is, when a private concern is operated inefficiently, they go belly up (unless of course they're in tight with the current Admin and they get bailed out with taxpayer funds), while public entities simply get more and more taxpayer dollars.



There's a couple of "tactical errors" with your post.

For starters the vast majority of the bailouts were done by the former regime, not the current one.

GM is one of the few that got a bailout from both regimes. The difference between the Lil' George Bailout and the Obama Bailout was Lil' George gave GM $14.24B without any strings attached and the top 2% at GM awarded that money to themselves in non-taxable bonuses and walked out the door with a big smile on their face.

With Obama's bailout the money could only be used to build autos and NONE could go toward bonuses.

Also, believe it or not the USA has made $30.4B profit off the bailouts.

Heck, the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has profited the American Taxpayers $15B!

Paul

[RoyGBiv]

Also, believe it or not the USA has made $30.4B profit off the bailouts.

Not.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/09/news/economy/bailout-profit/


The current accounting shows a narrow loss just under $3 billion from TARP when comparing total bailouts of $423.7 billion from the fund to total payments back to Treasury.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/30/news/economy/tarp-price-watchdog/index.html


Little more than five years later, the rescue of Wall Street and Main Street during the financial crisis has cost taxpayers about $40 billion, according to a watchdog agency report
.............
The report attributed much of the $40 billion TARP cost from losses or write-offs on parts of bailouts of the auto industry and American International Group (AIG).

While $50 billion went to General Motors (GM), $12 billion is considered written off or lost, the report said. Of the $68 billion that went to AIG, $13.5 billion is considered lost.

[MDS]

This thread needs humor.

2409

[Haraise]

This thread needs humor.


That, is a win.

[Jac]

That, is a win.

Indeed... So much win.

[SeriousStudent]

That's why he wears that big Staff button. ;)

I'm a huge Office Space fan, and have my own red Swingline stapler. I also order Margaritas with no salt.

[TGS]

Mario, that was superb!!!


That's why he wears that big Staff button. ;)

I'm a huge Office Space fan, and have my own red Swingline stapler. I also order Margaritas with no salt.

Strangely enough, we've been having software problems at work that kicked some people out of a program. So one of them asked, "Umm, I didn't get fired, did I? Because I'm not in the system, anymore."

Me: "It's possible, but one question. Do you have a red stapler, by any chance?"

Joe: "Huh?"

Me: "Yup, now you're definitely fired. Take a knee and punch yourself in the face at the same time."

Apparently Office Space is too old for young adults, these days.

[SeriousStudent]

The funny thing is, that is how I got the red stapler. It was a gag gift from one of my minions. Whenever a C-level executive gets separated, I'm the one that completely smokes their access to everything.

So when somebody's badge doesn't let them into the parking garage, and their cell phone is magically back to the factory reset.....

Nothing funnier than sum dood in a Bimmer screaming at a cell phone, blocking traffic at 8 ayem.

[fixer]

1) Protecting the Nation against Financial Bankruptcy: Gov't financial policies that prevent Financial Depressions and stimulate the economy. Where do people look when the economy is tanking or there is widespread fraud?....THe Feds.

It's important to separate the POLITICAL differences we have over these programs from whether the gov't is successful at operating them. Very often partisans like to claim a particular program is horrible and exaggerate their problems because they have a political difference over whether the program should exist. If you don't agree with a particular program, that is perfectly fine, but don't trash the gov't program just because you disagree with it philosophically.

Cody

I appreciate the attempt at a thought provoking post.

The other items on your list are debatable, this one is not.

The measures taken by "Feds" and in particular the Federal Reserve have not prevented a financial depression. It has extended the time for the next one, and made the potential magnitude much, much worse.

[cclaxton]

I appreciate the attempt at a thought provoking post.

The other items on your list are debatable, this one is not.

The measures taken by "Feds" and in particular the Federal Reserve have not prevented a financial depression. It has extended the time for the next one, and made the potential magnitude much, much worse.
The nation had a number of depressions in the late 1800's and once the great depression happened, the Nation had had enough. That is why Congress created the FDIC, and began to regulate Wall Street. Fraud, corruption, and outright theft was rampant.

The lessons of history seem to be missing from this discussion. Go back and read American History. There are damn good reasons why Union's formed and companies had to be regulated and the Fed had to be created....unregulated Capitalism failed. When companies have an even playing field, and there are referees and regulators who reduce fraud and deceptive business practices and help the economy WHEN NECESSARY, this is what makes it all work. I am not saying it should be heavy regulation...it has to be the RIGHT amount of regulation. My own opinion is the Wall Street needs more oversight and there needs to be more laws to prevent fraud. But, on the other hand, businesses need less paperwork, less bureaucracy and ensuring the cost of entry is not too high.

It is a balance and the debate of public policy has to include all the small details which partisans hate...it's much easier to make a political point using generalities. Once you actually get into the policy-making details, you realize there are reasons why we got the rules and laws we have....and a lot has to do with the lessons of history.
Cody

[JV_]

Once you actually get into the policy-making details, you realize there are reasons why we got the rules and laws we have....and a lot has to do with the lessons of history.

And once we start living with those policies, we realize how inept the government is at solving problems.

[LittleLebowski]

a lot has to do with the lessons of history.
Cody

This book (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1595553517/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1595553517&linkCode=as2&tag=ratio07-20) helped clarify a lot for me.

Just because unions were once needed does not mean they should bankrupt cities and states now.

[orionz06]

People that suck at their jobs and can't be fired and get raises because of a contract...

Do we want those people handling your license to carry?

You'd have to be crazy to believe that.

[BaiHu]

I find it insulting that you claim others aren't reading history just because your version of history makes you feel better about government.

Here's a brief overview of how I see the government and it's ineptitude during the great depression and the new deal: http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB123353276749137485?mobile=y

I see it no differently this time around.

[RoyGBiv]

unions
http://the-word-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/worms.jpg


( I http://fiddlerman.com/wp-content/forum-smileys/heart.gif Judge Andy. )

[cclaxton]

This book (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1595553517/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1595553517&linkCode=as2&tag=ratio07-20) helped clarify a lot for me.

Just because unions were once needed does not mean they should bankrupt cities and states now.
Completely agree. Someone once told me that tens of thousands of Union contracts are renewed every year without any issues and the unions and companies have a healthy relationship. What we hear about is when things go bad or strikes happen, or abusive stuff, and it's the "bad apple" problem...
My own experience with Union workers is it totally depends on the Shop Steward..how it is run locally. I have had electrical workers that were the best, and have seen other situations where everything was "not my job" and slow of foot. It all depends on the locals IMO.

But I think Unions are adjusting...they are being forced to adjust.
Cody

[orionz06]

I would love to go through life with my fingers in my ears screaming la la la competently oblivious to the world around me...

[Tamara]

For those of you with your heads in the sand, this book is a good start.

Talk about negative salesmanship! Are you the guy who came up with the DNC's "Why Won't You Stupid Cousin-Humping Rednecks Vote For Us?" 2008 campaign strategy? ;)

[Guinnessman]

Talk about negative salesmanship! Are you the guy who came up with the DNC's "Why Won't You Stupid Cousin-Humping Rednecks Vote For Us?" 2008 campaign strategy? ;)

That's pretty dang funny! I am actually a little offended that "DNC" was mentioned with my quote in the same post. ;)

BTW, does "DNC" stand for "Definitely Not a Commie?" Or were you referring to that other "DNC?" LOL.

[TCinVA]

Those of you who love to learn lessons from history should read Robert Caro's books on LBJ.

[LittleLebowski]

Those of you who love to learn lessons from history should read Robert Caro's books on LBJ.

Yeah, I'd chip in for a copy to send to CClaxton.

[RoyGBiv]

tens of thousands of Union contracts are renewed every year without any issues and the unions and companies have a healthy relationship.
I'd venture to guess that less than 20% of union contracts are renewed willingly, from the viewpoint of management. Unions are a gun to the head of management (frequently, not always). And don't get me started on public employee unions.

Unions are also not loved by their members. Union membership rate is currently about 7%, a near-historic low. Employees are rejecting unionization, even when management advocates in favor of it (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/02/20/for-american-unions-membership-trails-far-behind-public-support/). In a recent example, SEIU membership decreased by 80% after employees were no longer forced to pay dues (http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/20032).

Healthy? No.

[cclaxton]

I'd venture to guess that less than 20% of union contracts are renewed willingly, from the viewpoint of management. Unions are a gun to the head of management (frequently, not always). And don't get me started on public employee unions.

Unions are also not loved by their members. Union membership rate is currently about 7%, a near-historic low. Employees are rejecting unionization, even when management advocates in favor of it (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/02/20/for-american-unions-membership-trails-far-behind-public-support/). In a recent example, SEIU membership decreased by 80% after employees were no longer forced to pay dues (http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/20032).

Healthy? No.
Roy,
My point is that it's unfair to generalize. It's best to look at the specific union and specific situation. For instance, I know of a company that is owned by the Union members themselves and the President is also shop foreman. Believe it or not, there are still companies that were run as badly as Pullman back in the 1800's....which played a huge role in the success of unions. I don't belong, as I have been management all of my life.

Generalizations suck the very life out of an impartial analysis of the facts.
Cody
Cody

[RoyGBiv]

Someone once told me that tens of thousands of Union contracts are renewed every year without any issues and the unions and companies have a healthy relationship. What we hear about is when things go bad or strikes happen, or abusive stuff, and it's the "bad apple" problem...


Generalizations suck the very life out of an impartial analysis of the facts.

I'm gonna stop here. Peace.

[cclaxton]

Also, it's unfair to use today's knowledge and wisdom to cast judgements that were made many years/decades ago. Decisions were made based on best available information and wisdom AT THAT TIME. As time goes on and as we learn we have to make changes. (A lot like shooting).

For instance, Richard Nixon was a gun control advocate. DC was being rocked with a lot of armed grocery store thefts. Again, it was because of the times we lived in...THEN. That is what I mean by an understanding of American History. We need to go back to that time and consider why the decisions were made at that time. Reading books that interject modern judgements of those situations is just not the best way to really understand why we did those things.
Cody

[orionz06]

I have been management all of my life.

This actually helps me understand your positions a little better.

[Shellback]

Maybe a lil' more humor...

https://westernrifleshooters.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/clip_image002_thumb5.jpg

[Josh Runkle]

The nation had a number of depressions in the late 1800's and once the great depression happened, the Nation had had enough. That is why Congress created the FDIC, and began to regulate Wall Street. Fraud, corruption, and outright theft was rampant.

The lessons of history seem to be missing from this discussion. Go back and read American History. There are damn good reasons why Union's formed and companies had to be regulated and the Fed had to be created....unregulated Capitalism failed.

This sounds like the BS that college sophomores quote because they've watched Rachel Maddow 5 times in their life.

1) Capitalism didn't fail during the Great Depression. In fact, about 20% of Americans made booming amounts of money. There is no scientific data to suggest that government intervention helped stopped the Great Depression, but there is plenty to suggest that they caused it and prolonged it. In the end, the government ended up with exceedingly more power than before...which is the exact same thing happening today, and it is the exact same thing that will happen in all future economic slumps: 20% will get much richer, 20% will be unaffected, 60% will get exceedingly poorer, the government will be the cause and will take "emergency steps" to protect the people that only end with the government having gained more power.

2) There is a difference between Capitalism and Free Market Enterprise. Learn it.

3) Game Theory. One need only listen to the past 6 year of Obama, and past 8 years of Democrats in Congress to hear clip after clip of leaders spouting zero-sum thinking like "the pie is only so big". The past six year's focus (same thinking as around the Great Depression) has been on how to "get people back to work" or how to "help them find a job". There is ZERO mention about how to help people start new businesses, and the focus is only on how to help people get jobs. This is by design.

[David S.]

The nation had a number of depressions in the late 1800's and once the great depression happened, the Nation had had enough. That is why Congress created the FDIC, and began to regulate Wall Street. Fraud, corruption, and outright theft was rampant.


100 years later: They really fixed that problem, now didn't they.

[TAZ]

The fed reserve wasn't dreamt up by the government. It was dreamt up by a bunch of rich bankers who didn't like the idea of loosing their fortunes to people who realized their banks were screwing them. The gig was up and we needed to find the next gimmick to keep Americans in debt. Don't be naive enough to think that the fed reserve is there to protect the American public. It's there to milk money from you in as many ways as possible without any choice from you.

Also to condemn people for looking at the big picture and judging government performance over the years rather than simply with narrow focus is pretty naive. How do you expect anyone to learn from history if we can't look at the total outcome of those decisions?

Lest see Sunday my wife asked me to play in a soccer game cause her coed team was short. Based on information I had available to me (no aches or pains, joints all stable and finished with rehab) I agreed. Great decision. It's a model to follow next time the question comes up right? I mean I had information stating that I was good to go. Unfortunately, it was still a bad decision cause I managed to re injure my shoulder and do more damage than before. In the future it might be wise to not only review the information on hand, but also include new data generated.

As a governmental example. SSI worked as advertised for the first generation of recipients. They paid in little and got a good chunk out. Using ONLY that data set one would conclude that its a great program. However, if you look at the current situation you might decide that a Ponzi scheme is not such a good idea after all as the pyramid eventually inverses (more people taking than putting in) and the program will fail or result in an undue burden on the following generation. As such there must be an adjustment made and that adjustment can't be to stick ones head deeper in sand and hope that one of these generations will eventually get fuck happy and have more kids than old people.

[fixer]

The nation had a number of depressions in the late 1800's and once the great depression happened, the Nation had had enough. That is why Congress created the FDIC, and began to regulate Wall Street. Fraud, corruption, and outright theft was rampant.

The lessons of history seem to be missing from this discussion. Go back and read American History. There are damn good reasons why Union's formed and companies had to be regulated and the Fed had to be created....unregulated Capitalism failed. When companies have an even playing field, and there are referees and regulators who reduce fraud and deceptive business practices and help the economy WHEN NECESSARY, this is what makes it all work. I am not saying it should be heavy regulation...it has to be the RIGHT amount of regulation. My own opinion is the Wall Street needs more oversight and there needs to be more laws to prevent fraud. But, on the other hand, businesses need less paperwork, less bureaucracy and ensuring the cost of entry is not too high.

It is a balance and the debate of public policy has to include all the small details which partisans hate...it's much easier to make a political point using generalities. Once you actually get into the policy-making details, you realize there are reasons why we got the rules and laws we have....and a lot has to do with the lessons of history.
Cody

Your post is teetering on non-sequitur.

I'll "read American history" if you'll read this: Capitalism works when those who takes risks are allowed to fail.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing at all, healthy about the measures taken in 2009 or since that has allowed stronger and healthier companies to prevail over the stupid and weak ones. That is progress. That is recovery. What we have now is a government that is giving the addicts huge doses of methadone and calling it recovery.

This nation has an economic system that is spoiled almost rotten by cronyism, corruption and groupthink. 2009 was a huge potential to clean house and start over stronger.

BTW...all the government measures invented after the Great Depression didn't stop the triggering events of 2009 (were they thinking about derivatives in the 1930s?). There will be a new financially engineered product that no one understands (but 23 yr old Math PhDs from MIT...who largely invent them) that triggers the next one.

The government is always one step behind.

Want to stop the stupidity? Let the blood run in the streets (figuratively).

Just watch what happens when the Fed ends easing programs and ZIRP.

[BaiHu]

Just watch what happens when the Fed ends easing programs and ZIRP.

Sadly, they'll find they can't do that. Enter the "Japan" chapter of American history or the "how government should not involve itself in 'fixing' an economy".

[Joe in PNG]

Top down, big government command economies is the "Teacup Weaver" of economics.
Yes, it can be made to work, to a limited extent, but you'll never shoot your best that way.

[BLR]

Top down, big government command economies is the "Teacup Weaver" of economics.
Yes, it can be made to work, to a limited extent, but you'll never shoot your best that way.

This place really, really needs a like button.

Successful gooberment is an oxymoron.

[fixer]

Sadly, they'll find they can't do that. Enter the "Japan" chapter of American history or the "how government should not involve itself in 'fixing' an economy".

I can't disagree. However I fear that Japan's experience with monetary theory ( not capitalism, socialism, or some derivative) will embolden US fiscal policy designers.

"See, now, Japan has passed quadrillions (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-10/japan-debt-update-%C2%A5102000000000000000) in debt and they are still seeing the sun rise."

[BaiHu]

I can't disagree. However I fear that Japan's experience with monetary theory ( not capitalism, socialism, or some derivative) will embolden US fiscal policy designers.

"See, now, Japan has passed quadrillions (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-10/japan-debt-update-%C2%A5102000000000000000) in debt and they are still seeing the sun rise."
My fears exactly. Lest we forget that Japan is also a homogenous nation that already spent hundreds of years in civil war that made the US civil war look, well, civil. The motivating factors to keep the peace and keep "pushing on" in a more harmonious, mechanical way makes them look like cylons compared to the US. But we can do the impossible anyway, cuz 'Muhrika!

[RoyGBiv]

I can't disagree. However I fear that Japan's experience with monetary theory ( not capitalism, socialism, or some derivative) will embolden US fiscal policy designers.

"See, now, Japan has passed quadrillions (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-10/japan-debt-update-%C2%A5102000000000000000) in debt and they are still seeing the sun rise."
Fundamentally, it's still a problem of ignorant voters and a complicit 4th Estate.
Very difficult to fix.

[MDS]

Fundamentally, it's still a problem of ignorant voters and a complicit 4th Estate.
Very difficult to fix.

Boom, headshot. Though I'll say that IMO that the complicit 4th estate is just one of the reasons for ignorant voters. And that disciplined voters could overcome their own ignorance as well as the 4th estate's complicity. So IMO the core, underlying, foundational problem is undisciplined voters, looking for shortcuts in life. It's more complicated than just money, but money discipline is a convenient, and IMO good-enough proxy for voter discipline. The only fix, IMO, is to reboot suffrage so that only financially disciplined people can vote. In Mario Fantasy Land, I'd propose a 28th Amendment (http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?6573-The-28th-Amendment) to that end.

All of this, of course, is just IMO... ;)

[Kyle Reese]

Boom, headshot. Though I'll say that IMO that the complicit 4th estate is just one of the reasons for ignorant voters. And that disciplined voters could overcome their own ignorance as well as the 4th estate's complicity. So IMO the core, underlying, foundational problem is undisciplined voters, looking for shortcuts in life. It's more complicated than just money, but money discipline is a convenient, and IMO good-enough proxy for voter discipline. The only fix, IMO, is to reboot suffrage so that only financially disciplined people can vote. In Mario Fantasy Land, I'd propose a 28th Amendment (http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?6573-The-28th-Amendment) to that end.

All of this, of course, is just IMO... ;)

I'd support that, and it would go a long way towards fixing our country.

[BLR]

I'd support that, and it would go a long way towards fixing our country.

It's simple: Pay taxes to have a vote. We can call it the "Skin in the Game Amendment"

[JV_]

It's simple: Pay taxes to have a vote. We can call it the "Skin in the Game Amendment"

What kind of taxes? Federal Income? Mediscare? Social Security?

[BLR]

What kind of taxes? Federal Income? Mediscare? Social Security?

Until handouts are done away with, lets go with income.

If everyone gets a vote, how about doing away with all takes except sales? Flat rate of (for nothing but an example) 7% on everything from snickers to gas to houses to jets. No tax exemptions for anyone, including churches, schools, and NFP.

[JV_]

We will never do away with handouts.

[RevolverRob]

Until handouts are done away with, lets go with income.

If everyone gets a vote, how about doing away with all takes except sales? Flat rate of (for nothing but an example) 7% on everything from snickers to gas to houses to jets. No tax exemptions for anyone, including churches, schools, and NFP.

I would love a flat rate tax, but I doubt 7% sales would be sufficient. Texas runs an 8.25% sales tax in virtually all counties and barely makes it work for this state (we are required to balance the budget by state constitution). If you want to run a sales tax regime you will likely have to go with a VAT which makes it much more complicated. Or have the highest sales tax rate at something like 14-15%

But really the bigger issue is voters - Right now we are still running on more or less mob rule. Less than 60% voter turnout on major elections even less on minor ones. As far as I am concerned the easiest way to increase voter turnout and actual involvement in the system is to remove the right to vote for those who do not vote in presidential or mid-term elections. If you don't use it - lose it.

-Rob

[JV_]

I find it interesting that we're all very quick to point out what the founding fathers intended for the 2nd A, but we're not discussing it with this topic.

[JodyH]

Five Gov't Programs That Are Successful
“You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means”

[rob_s]

I am not trying to tell people what they can and can't do.

Actually, I think you are. And it wasn't until this thread and the obvious leanings contained in the OP that I really understood why.

[rob_s]

Also, it's unfair to use today's knowledge and wisdom to cast judgements that were made many years/decades ago. Decisions were made based on best available information and wisdom AT THAT TIME. As time goes on and as we learn we have to make changes. (A lot like shooting).

on this I agree with you. Every time some dimwit cries about Christopher Columbus or Andrew Jackson I think the exact same thing.

But the government programs you cite do not fall under this heading. The government programs you cote are ongoing. Tonic tinue the comparison, it would be as if in 2014 the US Army was riding into Detroit to gun down the undesirables to clear the way for progress.

[RevolverRob]

I find it interesting that we're all very quick to point out what the founding fathers intended for the 2nd A, but we're not discussing it with this topic.

Someone pointed out to me, correctly I feel, that if we were to take up arms and overthrow the government - The grand experiment that is our country is over. Certainly, we might be able to recreate a portion of what our founding fathers put forth, in the same way that they recreated themselves aspects of the unwritten British constitution. But we would have run our course and be finished as a country. It is very easy to think we could re-write or rebuild efficiently, I do not believe we can.

Have we forgotten that the first Continental Congress was convened in 1774 and it was not until 1789 that the revolution was concluded, the constitution written, ratified, and placed into effect? Fifteen years is a long time in a world where technological advancements and competing interests exist. There are nearly 315 million Americans today with competing interests, today. In 1774? 3.9 million. We are nearly 100 times larger today...

No, I feel that while we have recourse (voting, judicial recourse for finding and prosecuting criminals) we should use them. I haven't yet given up hope (in the true sense) that we can be successful. I do, however, think that we are nearing the beginning of a point of no return, an event horizon if you will, that will radically change the game.

[rob_s]

Someone pointed out to me, correctly I feel, that if we were to take up arms and overthrow the government - The grand experiment that is our country is over. Certainly, we might be able to recreate a portion of what our founding fathers put forth, in the same way that they recreated themselves aspects of the unwritten British constitution. But we would have run our course and be finished as a country. It is very easy to think we could re-write or rebuild efficiently, I do not believe we can.

Have we forgotten that the first Continental Congress was convened in 1774 and it was not until 1789 that the revolution was concluded, the constitution written, ratified, and placed into effect? Fifteen years is a long time in a world where technological advancements and competing interests exist. There are nearly 315 million Americans today with competing interests, today. In 1774? 3.9 million. We are nearly 100 times larger today...

No, I feel that while we have recourse (voting, judicial recourse for finding and prosecuting criminals) we should use them. I haven't yet given up hope (in the true sense) that we can be successful. I do, however, think that we are nearing the beginning of a point of no return, an event horizon if you will, that will radically change the game.

Not being a big history buff I really don't know the answer to this, but has there ever been a society that has done anything other than reach a pinnacle and then devolve to the point that it either eats itself or succumbs to a stronger outside threat?

[BaiHu]

Entropy. It's not just for science class.

[fixer]

Entropy. It's not just for science class.

"Four Laws of Thermodynamics that have been successful"

[RevolverRob]

Not being a big history buff I really don't know the answer to this, but has there ever been a society that has done anything other than reach a pinnacle and then devolve to the point that it either eats itself or succumbs to a stronger outside threat?

Not that I am aware of. I think the longest running confederation/nation-state we have existing today is Sweden (established monarchy in 1523). Obviously, there were civilizations in the past that experienced long periods of prosperity (Persia, Greece, Roman Empire, Ancient and Medieval China and Japan, the Holy Roman Empire, Ottoman, Ancient Egypt, Mayan, Incan etc.) but all of them were ultimately lost. And even the longest running ones we have today like Switzerland (established originally in 1291) were conquered (in this case by Napoleon) and altered radically at some point. Although in the case of Switzerland after that it came back together in the same confederation (more or less) that had existed since 1291.