Rob's House

I love the idea of high speed rail, but other than selling or leasing land rights to build it I don't think the government should build it. If it provides a better transportation option for enough people to make it worthwhile it could operate on a for profit basis. If the cost would make ticket sales prohibitively expensive it's not productive in an economic sense. As far as the smart grid, I don't know enough about it to give specifics, but a better, more efficient, & more secure power grid could be an appropriate project for government to undertake under the same principles I explained for infrastrucure in general as well as potentially for national security reasons. As far as man-made global warming theory, it's not so much my contention that the theory is necessarily a hoax, although I'm sure I've said that, but more that the movement behind it is bull ****. If someone not using a mercater projection to show proportionality were to present empirical data explaining why their theory is correct, rather than telling me how many "scientists" support the theory I'd be more inclined to listen. But even if we establish that man-made carbon emissions are creating a potential global disaster, I still have yet to hear any realistic proposals to address the matter. Most of the "solutions" are "do-something" ideas that are based not on any logical or realistic plan to significantly reduce these emissions, but rather are based on the desire for the plan to work. And most of these plans do virtually nothing to curb a meaningful % of global carbon emissions but have a very high economic cost that has very significant detrimental effects on the overall economy. Edit: I'm all for retrofitting, but not under a categorical approach, but rather on a case by case analysis. Obviously it makes sense to upgrade your technology if it will pay for itself in energy savings, but I don't want to spend $1000 to save $100. As far as government's role I don't think it should be imposed on businesses or individuals. Generally speaking they will upgrade to more efficient technologies when the cost-benefit ratio makes it economically viable.

Shhh

He's really a leprechaun with Giantism.

It's cool. I don't recall the specifics but generally speaking I think everyone agrees that infrastructure is an essential government function. Much of it is appropriate for government because the external benefits and capital investment required make it impractical to leave to the private sector. There's certainly room for debate over what level of government is most appropriate to undertake particular products. Where I assume we differ is that where logistics make it practical to charge those who use a service for its utility, those projects should be PRIMARILY left to the private sector because when that utility is sufficient to warrant such a project it will be profitable. It it's not profitable it ALMOST always means the overall cost to society outweighs the benefit & therefore subsidizing such a project is counterproductive and takes scarce resources that would have otherwise been used to create more utility and therefore the cost to society is the difference between the utility provided by the project and that which would have existed had those resources been more efficiently allocated. The problem is that it's easy to see the utility in the project that was undertaken, no matter how wasteful the capital investment may have been, while virtually impossible to quantify or determine what would have existed otherwise - same principle by which its easier to see the loss of an existing job than that of 2 jobs that would have been created but weren't.

Sadly, I think you're right.

If I must be labeled I suppose it's as close as any, although while principled I'm not terribly dogmatic.

All of it. The runaway spending, stifling regulation, hovering housing markets, QE, Obamacare, uncertainty, etc. There's not one key thing & I'm aware much of it isn't directly w/n his control but he has and has had a great deal of influence over the general direction & it's all geared towards tinkering.

Looks like libs see the writing on the wall and are preemptively making excuses for the failure of their ideology that will be painfully obvious once the economy is finally allowed to recover after removing Obama's foot from its throat. I'm not sure if this is excellent trolling on your part or just average trolling & the school is hungry enough to take the bait anyway, but either way it's highly entertaining watching them bite.

Jesus wrote a blank check

Last time Favre was healthy he had an MVP worthy season. He's had time to heal & he can still sling it. Most guys couldn't handle it physically at his age, but this is Brett frigging Favre we're talking about. Sure, it'll never happen, but we should be so lucky. +1

I agree there's value in a lot of what you mentioned; we'll differ on government's role & the type of innovation. I'll get back to you on specifics, I'm tired & I've got a big day tomorrow. Driving on a stretch of 95 that needs to be widened to go to DC for a seminar at CATO.

Demand for the sake of demand is silly. I'll try to get back to you on this. I'm tired & this would take a while to answer fully.

some of this I agree with, but I'm sure we differ on the specifics. Explain

So you're advocating government spending to increase demand for the sake of increasing demand? And you keep mentioning this difference of opinion we have on intervention as though it's the cause of our differing opinion. I don't disagree because I'm inherently opposed to government action. I'm opposed to it b/c I have yet to hear a rationale for how & why any proposals will work other than because those proposing them think and hope they'll work.

You guys always latch on to infrastructure, which is fundamentally different from most of what y'all advocate; and most of the "infrastructure" is garbage like high speed rails. Expanding clogged corridors that slow the gears of commerce & cost people productive time is useful; it's also not particularly left-wing. And putting "local workers back to work" doesn't mean anything. d

No offense but most of what you just said amounts to saying "invest in job creation" which is like saying "grow the economy from the middle class out". It sounds good in the abstract but no one can explain how it works. Also, you're essentially saying at a time where we're running record deficits we should spend substantially more and that will help the economy, but how does that work? I'm not biting. I'm wise to your underhanded tactics.

Learn the history of your own movement. You don't have to go back very far. I got your back on this one but from now on it's on you to keep your boys on point.

The problem is you guys can't give any specific plan and explain how it works without the ??? for step 2.

Uh. Apparently you didn't get the memo, but you guys aren't supposed to admit this. Left wing ideology is predicated upon the belief that income quintiles are static and people are in whichever they are because of whose crotch they got yanked out of. You're letting the cat out of the bag.

It's funny. It's like their 18, drunk, and going 130 mph down a dark, windy, unfamiliar road without a care in the world.

Fitz's throw was pretty sorry, but so is booing your QB on the first drive.

When the ship sinks you guys are going down too.

I'm not necessarily speaking to the political efficacy of the comments; I'm bored of that right now. I'm just saying it's the damn truth and I'm tired of everyone catering to the grown up children among us. You're an adult and deserve the respect of one when you act like one. If I'm paying your bills I really don't care if hearing it hurts your feelings. This is why I don't think people on public assistance should be allowed to vote and why I think the only way to tax income in a democracy is through a flat tax. I don't want to put sprinkles on a pile of **** and call it a sundae.

1. Sorry, you're just not making a very compelling argument here. If these problems are pervasive in certain school districts it seems like the problems are structural and tenure is a band aid on a broken bone. School districts that operate that way will lose good teachers to school districts that make education a priority. 2. I agree. If you have a community with parents and students that are concerned about education the problems will take care of themselves. Blaming teachers, funding, etc. is a cop out. They say it takes a village, but some villages do nothing but hold you back.

Why does the government have to help people buy a house? Why is it my obligation or anyone else's to pay for your house? What you speak of isn't compassion. It's immoral and destructive. It is bringing about the collapse of western civilization, it's happening before our very eyes and you guys refuse to see it. It brings new meaning to the saying "never underestimate the power of denial."