Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
i'm against federal funding of just about everything. that should cut the federal tax rate to the bone and if individual states want to build highways, schools, hospitals, fire depts, railways etc they can either look to the private sector or they can tax their citizens. red states would do more of the former and blue states, more of the latter. i'd be happy in my state and you would be happy in yours.
History amply demonstrates otherwise. Without the TVA, and the Rural Electrification Administration, just to name two examples you would still be reading your bibles to the light of kerosene lanterns.
countries don't compete. individual business within those countries compete. allowing south carolina and california to construct their own roads would render us a 3rd world nation??? what you are saying is that if the europeans don't hurry up and give away more of their sovereignty to brussels to build their roads, they will remain third world countries. after all in europe, all the member states build and finance their own roads. i don't think american interstates are that much better
Individual businesses don't do it alone. Countries provide the environment for competition. In a previous time, the U.S. did so and provided a first rate primary education, there were also highly subsidized colleges that graduated engineers, a transportation network, a uniform legal system, etc. Had the federal government not built the interstate highway system (or the canal system before that) the states would have either never done it or bickered over turf issues for decades.
I really can't believe I'm defensing something as basic as the interstate highway system. The right-wing has devolved into a bunch of reactionaries.
History amply demonstrates otherwise. Without the TVA, and the Rural Electrification Administration, just to name two examples you would still be reading your bibles to the light of kerosene lanterns.
before we went ahead with the tva, we were all still in the dark. how on earth did new york or la or get light. must've been the feds.
i believe that were it not for federal intervention, necessity would've delivered different technology. it might have started with technology which was already available back then like
Individual businesses don't do it alone. Countries provide the environment for competition. In a previous time, the U.S. did so and provided a first rate primary education, there were also highly subsidized colleges that graduated engineers, a transportation network, a uniform legal system, etc. Had the federal government not built the interstate highway system (or the canal system before that) the states would have either never done it or bickered over turf issues for decades.
I really can't believe I'm defensing something as basic as the interstate highway system. The right-wing has devolved into a bunch of reactionaries.
you make the terrible assumption that if the federal govt hadn't built the interstate, the interstate wouldn't exist. this is a load of nonsense. most of the interstate would've been built irrespective of the federal government. the states might've all done it differently, but the interstates would've been built
before we went ahead with the tva, we were all still in the dark. how on earth did new york or la or get light. must've been the feds.
In NY or LA, where population was densely populated, it was profitable for private utilities to supply power -- not so much in rural America. The amount of capital investment needed would require huge electric rates that the farmers couldn't pay. The TVA built the electric grid for the farmlands and food production increased, benefiting the nation as a whole.
It's just lie the Rachel Maddow commercial says, "not every idea that's good for the country is a profit making idea for a company somewhere."
you make the terrible assumption that if the federal govt hadn't built the interstate, the interstate wouldn't exist. this is a load of nonsense. most of the interstate would've been built irrespective of the federal government. the states might've all done it differently, but the interstates would've been built
There is no evidence that most of the interstate would've been built irrespective of the federal government. It surely wasn't getting built. Most of the states that the interstate goes through just didn't have money to build such a system. Many of the mid-west states have large land masses and little population base to provide those resources. To assume it would happen anyway is a huge assumption. Maybe the highway tooth fairy would provide the money?
It just seems as if you are using every possible excuse to justify not building the Interstate System, which should be obvious to everyone, was a very good idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammbriggs
i find it incredible that someone of your intelligence can't get your mind around the fact that there's more than one way to do something.
First, thanks for the complement. Second, I'm already acknowledging that there is more than one way to do something. I'm not denying the private sector has a role but the hard-right denies that the government has a role -- even in such basic areas as public works. If the Romans felt that way, they'd never have had roads, sewers or aqueducts.
In NY or LA, where population was densely populated, it was profitable for private utilities to supply power -- not so much in rural America. The amount of capital investment needed would require huge electric rates that the farmers couldn't pay. The TVA built the electric grid for the farmlands and food production increased, benefiting the nation as a whole.
It's just lie the Rachel Maddow commercial says, "not every idea that's good for the country is a profit making idea for a company somewhere."
once again you make a whole lot of assumptions. personally, i believe that we'd be a lot further along with off grid technology if it wasn't for the tva. i find it incredible that someone of your intelligence can't get your mind around the fact that there's more than one way to do something. people are pretty resourceful and if the govt doesn't provide electricity, they will eventually figure out how to create their own.
It's just lie the Rachel Maddow commercial says, "not every idea that's good for the country is a profit making idea for a company somewhere."
ok, so i just watched the video and you know what, rachel madcow is right. there is no way that a private for profit company will build a bridge in the middle of nowhere to get five people a day from one side of the middle of nowhere to the other side of the middle of nowhere.
if enough people wanted to get from one side of a place to another, entreprenuers would emerge with a multitude of different ideas to make this possible. the most efficient way will win out, unless some unscrupulous developer can convice the govt to pay for it. in that case, the govt backed idea will crowd out all the others which might have been more efficient
i'm a big proponent of alternative energy but i don't agree with subsidies. subsidies of ethanol and ethanol plants have crowded out other potentially better ideas by diverting resources which might have flowed into technolgy like algae or biomas
they would not, that's exactly the point. it does however give states the leeway to experiment.
The real problem with this country today is that the people do not have any education in the basic principals of the human rights this country was founded on.
First and foremost, the founding fathers believed every man was a sovereign, and that his rights as a sovereign were his at birth, and that it is governments that refuse to acknowledge those rights.
That a government may not acknowledge your rights, in no way means they do not exist.
It is the duty of every sovereign to stand against government tyranny and the illegal assumption of powers not given to government by the people.
Governments are entities of evil, run by ambitious corrupt men who desire to rule over others.
They are to be mistrusted and restrained less they become the masters instead of the servants they are intended to be.
There is no evidence that most of the interstate would've been built irrespective of the federal government. It surely wasn't getting built. Most of the states that the interstate goes through just didn't have money to build such a system. Many of the mid-west states have large land masses and little population base to provide those resources. To assume it would happen anyway is a huge assumption. Maybe the highway tooth fairy would provide the money?
It just seems as if you are using every possible excuse to justify not building the Interstate System, which should be obvious to everyone, was a very good idea.
if the population was too small to justify building an interstate to serve it, then you better believe those interstates wouldn't have been built. that's exactly the point, there isn't enough of a demand for those roads and therefore they shouldn't be built. if people want to have the convenience of an interstate system, they can move to an area where they exist, they can move to a place where the population is expanding and demand will soon exist for someone to build said interstate or they can stay where they are and enjoy the seclusion which is probably how they like it.
the roads which the federal govt built in places where there wasn't sufficient demand were just a waste of resources and the money would've been better spent by the taxpayers from whom they took the money to finance such boondoggles.
and yes there is evidence that loads of roads were being built:
"In the first three decades ofthe 19thcentury Americans built morethan 10,000 miles of turnpikes, mostly in New England and the Middle Atlantic states. Relative to the economy at that time, this effort exceeded the post—World War II interstate highway system that present-day Americans assume had to be primarily planned and financed by the federal government."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
