[DeTomaso] Something to shoot for (NPC)

[Sean Korb]

On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Ken Green <kenn_green at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Sean,
>
>     I don't think any of us want to see people living in terrible conditions
> and dying in the street, but I think the problem with the government taking
> care of everyone in need is:
>
> 1)  the government is terribly inefficient.

Yes, and large companies are... more efficient?  They do make more
money, but I've worked for a couple of large companies.  It's a
testament to human talent and energy that they survive at all.

> 2)  the welfare system motivated women to have more children and not marry
> the fathers.

Who?  I've met (and been) a family on welfare or two.  More kids
equals more problems.  Access to birth control and health care is very
welcome.

> 3)  the government supports teachers unions that demand life time jobs for
> terrible teachers.

Who?  What percentage of teachers are terrible?  What is their impact?
 How do you judge who is a terrible teacher?  Who judges?

> 4)  there is not an infinite amount of money to tax to help the needy.
> etc.

Very true.  That's why we have to have painful discussions about it
all the time :)

>    We are currently seeing that the government threw away half a billion for
> obsolete solar technology at Solendra (officers making almost a million a
> year) and another half a billion for a car made in Finland that will
> probably be a failure (unless more tax money is thrown at it in the form of
> tax credits).  This doesn't give me much confidence in Washington.

They'll throw away more money.  And they'll sponsor a few
breakthroughs and spin them off to corporations just like the space
program and DARPA did with the Internet.  Was it worth it to sponsor
failed companies and successful companies?  How do you measure the
cost/benefit?   Some of the money we spend on defense is going to
change our lives for the better dramatically.  Is it worth it if we
know that some of that technology will kill people or be sold to
nations that will want to kill us?

Gad that Finnish car is the most hideous and deplorable creation I've
ever seen.  I wish someone had just pointed at it and said "yuch!" and
saved us a little $$$.

>    The OWS folks correctly point out that tax payers should never ever again
> bail out big business, but their main goal seems to be a nanny state, and
> that just does not work (look at Greece).

Agreed (the Greece thing).  Personally I think the US has the best way
of balancing socialism with corporate needs. It will always be a
struggle.  More transparency and more information will help a lot; but
mostly we have to keep talking.

I don't think the OWS wants a nanny state, though I bet a chunk of
them do.  They mostly seem to think there should be regulation of
banking practices like we had in the '40s through the '70s.  And they
feel the government has a role in presenting opportunity in education
and livelihood.  Hmmm... maybe that is a nanny state after all :)

sean

-- 
Sean Korb spkorb at spkorb.org http://www.spkorb.org
'65,'68 Mustangs,'68 Cougar,'78 R100/7,'60 Metro,'59 A35,'71 Pantera #1382
"The more you drive, the less intelligent you get" --Miller
"Computers are useless.  They can only give you answers." -P. Picasso