You just dont want to answer this?
Is it because I asked for specifics?
Can you be more specific? When you say infrastructure, besides saftey (police firefighters etc) what other things do you, and I am assuming free buffalo, consider to be prime and necessary concerns of government? what do you consider unnecassary infrastructure. Specifics please, IE education, parks & recreation etc.Originally Posted by DelawareDistrict
People who wonder if the glass is half empty or full miss the point. The glass is refillable.
You just dont want to answer this?
Is it because I asked for specifics?
People who wonder if the glass is half empty or full miss the point. The glass is refillable.
I haven't answered because I just saw the thread. My opinions are mine, some may be shared by FreeBuffalo, some may not. The thoughts expressed by myself on this forum should not be construed to be anything other than my own personal thoughts.Originally Posted by steven
If I were to make a statement on behalf of FreeBuffalo, I would preface the statement with verbage indicating so.
I will have an answer shortly.
The path is clear
Though no eyes can see
The course laid down long before.
And so with gods and men
The sheep remain inside their pen,
Though many times they've seen the way to leave.
Necessary infrastructure would include, transportation (roads), police, fire, courts, prisons - basic essentials only. It would not include schools, hospitals or entitlement programs. My basic premise is that if there is a need for a service, private enterprise will respond by providing that service, and do it at a cheaper cost than the government. As soon as you put something under government control, you add a new layer of cost to run it. Municipalities should provide spaces for parks but bid out the services to maintain the parks to private businesses. By trimming government in this manner, you will eliminate all of the costly patronage jobs which exert an ever-increasing upward spiral on the taxes we pay. People would have so much more money to invest into the economy, that the needs of people would be met and the overall wealth of all individuals would be greater. As for the Federal Government, it should stick to the duties expressly enumerated in the Constitution. That would include a standing army necessary only for the purposes of defending our borders.
The path is clear
Though no eyes can see
The course laid down long before.
And so with gods and men
The sheep remain inside their pen,
Though many times they've seen the way to leave.
I guess there isnt much in there I disagree with, although I do belive schools to be something profit shouldnt be a motive for..... and some would argue (and I would agree with them) that if our army was only for "defending our borders" we would be all speaking German now.
Thanks for the answer, I was just curious.
People who wonder if the glass is half empty or full miss the point. The glass is refillable.
The teachers union and the education bureacracy aren't interested in a profit motive. To do that they would have to compete to earn the business of the parents by running efficient, quality schools. They'd have to convince people to pay them for their services.Originally Posted by steven
I suppose it's just easier to force the ever increasing taxes down everyone's thoat with no need to prove their worth to anyone or earn anyone's business or respect. It's similar to the morals of a common street mugger.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)