The unnecessary felling of a tree, perhaps the old growth of centuries, seems to me a crime little short of murder. ~Thomas Jefferson
by Pops » Sat 06 Nov 2010, 17:53:51
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cloud9', 'L')udi, which would you prefer, prices so high that government assistance checks won’t buy a month’s worth of food or fewer people on government assistance? I’m a government employee and you people need to cut my salary.
I've always wondered how merit is established in government departments since there isn't an easy yardstick like profit.
I think you once said you are responsible for budgets for some number of people, do you think gov salaries are equivalent to those private business? How does job security figure in to the equation?
I'm wondering if there might be a way to establish some kind of fixed overhead percentage target- so for example, administration cost would not exceed, say, 5% of teacher salaries or whatever number.
I hear horror stories from family members who work in county and state government about the near complete impossibility of firing someone because of union rules - no matter how bad a job they do. Of course that's in CA so who knows, how do you find that aspect of government?
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
-

Pops
- Elite

-
- Posts: 19746
- Joined: Sat 03 Apr 2004, 04:00:00
- Location: QuikSac for a 6-Pac
-
by Oakley » Sat 06 Nov 2010, 19:20:20
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Fiddlerdave', ' ')The whole reason Social Security was started was because of the terrible plight of the elderly
I guess conservatives think SS was invented even though it wasn't needed - there were no poor people in the US because they were all being taken care of by private charity. But the guvmint decided to implement the program anyway, thereby creating poor people.
You guys actually believe your own propaganda despite the reality.
Here is an article to the contrary:
http://www.fff.org/comment/com0904s.asp$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here never was a popular demand for Social Security, even during the Great Depression. Few Americans were interested in the kind of government-run program that the German politician Otto von Bismarck had introduced in Europe. According to Social Security expert Carolyn Weaver, author of The Crisis in Social Security, in 1929 about 95 percent of senior citizens were self-supporting — an increasing number had private pension plans or annuities. Many seniors were helped out by family and friends.
I remember reading an article years ago by Walter Williams, the noted economist, where he described that if a person worked a normal work life, taking what he was forced to contribute to Social Security and instead contributed it to a private fund earning 5% a year, that he would retire with twice the benefit as Social Security paid him and have $500,000 to leave to his heirs to boot.
Social Security is a Ponzi scheme where the retirees are paid with contributions by the newcomers. There is no actuarially sound fund set aside to pay benefits; in reality there is nothing set aside at all because the federal government has taken (borrowed) any excess contributions and already spent them on general government spending. Eventually, as there are not enough new suckers to fund the requirements of the system it will collapse and then all dependent on it will suffer cruel harm. It encouraged people to abandon private retirement plans because they thought they would get a Social Security check, so they instead spent rather than saved and this source of capital funding decreased. There was nothing kind or effective that came from this government take over of retirement funding.
Thee is nothing kind or effective that comes from government charity (welfare) either. Compulsory charity destroys empathy; it creates resentment on the part of those forced to support others. It makes those receiving benefits dependent, and after a generation or two, takes away their ability to take care of themselves (just like a long term prisoner cannot deal with freedom on release from prison). Much of what is taken from some to be given to others is kept in the administration process. It encourages fraud and a sense of entitlement. In fact the system is theft itself, taking through force what belongs to one person and giving it to another.
Who do you think will be those who suffer the most as the economic pie contracts again and again under the weight of declining energy? Those most dependent on the system will the one out in the cold, figuratively and literally.
If you have any compassion for your fellow man, I suggest you abandon your support of the Republican/Democrat Party of plunder and control and instead do what you can to reduce government to a shadow of its present self. Government is nothing more than force, and should only be used for what a individual can legitimately use force, i.e., self defense. Any other government force is an immoral act of aggression.
by dolanbaker » Sat 06 Nov 2010, 19:36:03
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GASMON', ' ')Just WHAT can the common man do against "THE SYSTEM".?
Stop supporting it?
For those that can.. The best course of action is to bypass the banking system, get paid in cash and use cash for everything, no credit (debt) cards or anything that uses the banks.
It's the banking sector and those behind it that (mainly) caused this mess in the first place.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.:Anonymous
Our whole economy is based on planned obsolescence.
Hungrymoggy "I am now predicting that Europe will NUKE ITSELF sometime in the first week of January"
by Plantagenet » Sat 06 Nov 2010, 19:53:01
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dolanbaker', '
')It's the banking sector and those behind it that (mainly) caused this mess in the first place.
You can't have a speculative bubble unless you've got people driving up the price of an asset by speculating and purchasing the asset.....this is true even for houses.
The banks didn't buy the overpriced houses.......millions of people bought the overpriced houses and even refinanced their existing homes to take out cash...and every single one of them bought on the assumption that housing prices would continue to rise.
Never underestimate the ability of Joe Biden to f#@% things up---Barack Obama
-----------------------------------------------------------
Keep running between the raindrops.
-

Plantagenet
- Expert

-
- Posts: 26765
- Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
- Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
-