Agree

Funny thing is thats what god wants too.

Laus Deo
Semper Fi

Hmm? Guess it depends on what you call productive David. Government has the capacity to make jobs and create both personal and public wealth. I could rebuke you assertion ALLLLLLL DAY long but you still wouldn’t get it, so I give you only 7 minutes of my time.

If you are one to believe as most of us do, ‘that there is huge amounts of money ‘involved politics’ why do you think that is? Gains in personal wealth! This split between republican and democrats is little more the deciding “who” gets the most and who gets the least. Who’s interest is best served. What will be the focus and who will benefit and who will not.

Labor force

Workers on a “Jumbo Rig”; used for drilling Hoover Dam’s tunnels.
Soon after the dam was authorized, increasing numbers of unemployed converged on southern Nevada. Las Vegas, then a small city of some 5,000, saw between 10,000 and 20,000 unemployed descend on it.[27] A government camp was established for surveyors and other personnel near the dam site; this soon became surrounded by a squatters’ camp. Known as McKeeversville, the camp was home to men hoping for work on the project, together with their families.[28] Another camp, on the flats along the Colorado River, was officially called Williamsville, but was known to its inhabitants as Ragtown.[29] Once construction began, Six Companies hired large numbers of workers, with more than 3,000 on the payroll by 1932[30] and with employment peaking at 5,251 in July 1934.[31] “Mongolian” (Chinese) labor was forbidden by the construction contract,[31] while the number of blacks employed by Six Companies never exceeded thirty, mostly lowest-pay-scale laborers in a segregated crew,
Bolder Dam was a Government venture.

On December 21, 1928 President Coolidge signed the bill authorizing the dam.[18] The Boulder Canyon Project Act appropriated $165 million for the Hoover Dam along with the downstream Imperial Dam and All-American Canal, a replacement for Beatty’s canal entirely on the U.S. side of the border.[19] It also permitted the compact to go into effect when at least six of the seven states approved it. This occurred on March 6, 1929 with Utah’s ratification; Arizona did not approve it until 1944.[20]
Design, preparation and contracting

Hoover Dam architectural plans
Even before Congress approved the Boulder Canyon Project, the Bureau of Reclamation was considering what kind of dam should be used. Officials eventually decided on a massive concrete arch-gravity dam, the design of which was overseen by the Bureau’s chief design engineer John L. Savage. The monolithic dam would be thick at the bottom and thin near the top, and would present a convex face towards the water above the dam. The curving arch of the dam would transmit the water’s force into the abutments, in this case the rock walls of the canyon. The wedge-shaped dam would be 660 ft (200 m) thick at the bottom, narrowing to 45 ft (14 m) at the top, leaving room for a highway connecting Nevada and Arizona.[21]
On January 10, 1931, the Bureau made the bid documents available to interested parties, at five dollars a copy. The government was to provide the materials; but the contractor was to prepare the site and build the dam. The dam was described in minute detail, covering 100 pages of text and 76 drawings. A $2 million bid bond was to accompany each bid; the winner would have to post a $5 million performance bond. The contractor had seven years to build the dam, or penalties would ensue.[22]

The Panama Canal was a government venture

French construction, 1881–1889
In 1880, the first attempt to construct a sea-level canal began under the leadership of Ferdinand de Lesseps, builder of the Suez Canal, with substantial financing and support from Paris. The French effort went bankrupt after reportedly spending USD $287,000,000, and was largely abandoned by 1890. The Suez Canal was built in a much more benign environment but still took 10 years to complete its 102-mile length, about twice that of the Panama Canal. The French, under Ferdinand de Lesseps, began construction on a sea-level (i.e., without locks) canal through what was then Colombia’s province of Panama, on January 1, 1880. The French rushed to begin work, with insufficient prior study of the geology and hydrology of the region.[8] Excavation was conducted at such a steep angle that, in some years, rain-induced landslides poured nearly as much material into the canal as had been removed.[9]

1890–1903
At this time, various parties[who?] in the United States were interested in establishing a canal across the isthmus, with some favoring a route across Nicaragua (see Nicaragua Canal and Ecocanal) and others advocating the purchase of the French interests in Panama. A U.S. engineering panel was commissioned to study the potential of building the canal and recommended a sea-level canal to President Theodore Roosevelt. This canal design was recommended to President Theodore Roosevelt by Chief Engineer John Frank Stevens and was agreed to by him. The 115 feet (35 m)-high Gatun Dam, would create both the largest dam and the largest man-made lake (Gatun Lake) in the world at that time. In the end, a canal that operated with an elevated reservoir and a system of three locks to raise ships above sea level to Gatun Lake, and then lower them on the opposite ocean with another set of three locks, was seen as much less expensive, faster to build, and more feasible in design than the original vision of a sea-level canal. The water to fill and empty the locks would be taken from Gatun Lake by opening and closing enormous gates and valves and letting gravity propel the water from the lake. Gatun Lake would connect to the Pacific through the mountains at the Gaillard (Culebra) Cut.
Eventually, in June 1902, the U.S. Senate voted in favor of pursuing the Panamanian option, provided the necessary rights could be obtained. (It is claimed that the vote was swayed by William Nelson Cromwell.[11])

On January 22, 1903, the Hay-Herran Treaty was signed by United States Secretary of State John M. Hay and Dr. Tomás Herrán of Colombia. It would have granted the United States a renewable lease in perpetuity from Colombia on the land proposed for the canal.

Labor force

Workers on a “Jumbo Rig”; used for drilling Hoover Dam’s tunnels.
Soon after the dam was authorized, increasing numbers of unemployed converged on southern Nevada. Las Vegas, then a small city of some 5,000, saw between 10,000 and 20,000 unemployed descend on it.[27] A government camp was established for surveyors and other personnel near the dam site; this soon became surrounded by a squatters’ camp. Known as McKeeversville, the camp was home to men hoping for work on the project, together with their families.[28] Another camp, on the flats along the Colorado River, was officially called Williamsville, but was known to its inhabitants as Ragtown.[29] Once construction began, Six Companies hired large numbers of workers, with more than 3,000 on the payroll by 1932[30] and with employment peaking at 5,251 in July 1934.[31] “Mongolian” (Chinese) labor was forbidden by the construction contract,[31] while the number of blacks employed by Six Companies never exceeded thirty, mostly lowest-pay-scale laborers in a segregated crew,[

DeerInHeadlights says — “Hmm? Guess it depends on what you call productive David. Government has the capacity to make jobs and create both personal and public wealth. I could rebuke you assertion ALLLLLLL DAY long but you still wouldn’t get it, so I give you only 7 minutes of my time”.
I said Productive Jobs, Deer. Sure they can create jobs, but to do that they have to take the money from the private sector where the money is employed much more efficiently. Government involvement in creating jobs is a logical failure. Nobody with any education and an open mind could argue that Government employees, who are virtually guaranteed jobs, and who gain nothing by being innovative, and who lose nothing by being screw-ups, are going to work as hard and be as polite to their customers as would their private-sector counterparts. And Government job creation has been an experiential failure (you know, experience is the best teacher). Witness Amtrak, the Post Office, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the many other Government failures.
You can rebuke me all day long, Deer, because you are an ignorant Liberal who wouldn’t admit his ignorance no matter how much evidence I provided to prove it.
Perhaps if you read this book, it would wake you up. But I doubt it, because you are either sucking at the Government teet, or after spending numerous years being an ignorant Liberal you would be too prideful to read and learn how ignorant you have been:
http://mises.org/books/capitalism_kelly.pdf

And Deer,
You can cut and paste stories of all the Government ventures you want and it would be meaningless unless they are compared to equivalent private ventures and all costs are fully disclosed (something you won’t get with Government involvement).
The proof is in the pudding. The countries with the Biggest Governments (in relation to their population size) are also the countries with the Worst Economies. See here:
http://www.freetheworld.com/2011/reports/world/EFW2011_complete.pdf

Also, Deer, you might explain to the readers how Government with 20 million “productive” employees spends 42% of the GDP? That’s less than 7% of the population spending 42% of our economy.
And you might also answer this — Why, if the Government can create productive jobs, must they take 32% of our GDP (total taxes), and borrow and spend another 10% of the GDP? Why can’t they just be self-sufficient like the private sector which they pillage?

I might add that Boulder Dam was one of Hoover’s many Public Works Projects to get us out of the Depression. Did it work? Of course not.

DavidH say;
“Sane” people know that Government doesn’t create productive jobs — it destroys productive jobs by taking money from the real producers and handing it out to the non-producers”

“I said Productive Jobs, Deer. Sure they can create jobs, but to do that they have to take the money from the private sector where the money is employed much more efficiently.”

Okay, then David, you admit that Government “does create” jobs and personal wealth and now you are trying to tell us they just not productive job. So you are saying the City of Los Vegas and its population and all the River authorities’ good work in the state of Nevada are nonproductive efforts? That the Panama Canal took money away from people and gave back nothing in return. You are telling us that Panama Canal is not creating private a personal wealth as well as tax revenue and has been since it’s completion?

So you are some kind of efficiency business expert now? First you say government does not create productive jobs and now it’s efficiency that’s your concern?

“You can cut and paste stories of all the Government ventures you want and it would be meaningless unless they are compared to equivalent private ventures and all costs are fully disclosed (something you won’t get with Government involvement).”

I could for sure, be days at it~ but as I said earlier David, ~ I’m budgeting my time addressing your foolishness and immature notions about business and business matters. I know I can’t reach you but I can expose your foolishness and fallacy for what it is.

You only know what you’ve read and absorb only what feeds your personal insecurities. You are attempting to talk the talk while never walked the walk. Or to say , “All hat and no Cattle” You might have ran a snow cone stand when you could stand up.

The proof is in the pudding “ There would be no “PUDDING” David only merchants, family businesses, highwaymen, bandit, pirate and victims.

There are no private ventures to compare David. You don’t really believe some sheep herder was losing stock and decided in his spare time he’d construct the Great Wall of China to keep them together do you? You don’t believe some old farmer had some drainage problems and dug the Suez Canal do you?

There would be no large scale human endeavors under your Libertarian government David. A single person that powerful would be a serious threat to all. If I was that powerful, why should I put up with the likes of you? You’d go along, be quite or disappear. If you were that powerful why would you put up with the like of anyone like me?

People that manage to reach the top, stay at the top. Putting a well place boot on your neck and preventing you from standing erect to compete is more then just academic, it’s a promise.

Today, they have government doing it for them and just calling them “Libertarians” , “Democrats” or “Republicans” only changes the size of that boot and anyone is foolish to think otherwise. Would you prefer a size 10 1/2 democrat or 13 republican or a 11 libertarian?

What is your Liberal beef with Ron Paul, Norm?
He would let you gamble your fortune away, if you pleased.
He would let you drug yourself into a stupor, if you pleased.
He would let you sleep with all the prostitutes you could buy, if you pleased.
Ron Paul would let you do all the irresponsible things your Liberal heart desires, Norm.
So what could you possibly have against him?
Oh yeah, he wouldn’t let you Force other people to carry you on their shoulders after you did all those irresponsible things. How mean of him.

DAVEH
I agree with Ron on military spending and American imperialism. Many of his other ideas, although I disagree with them, would actually serve me well, due to lower taxes and less intrusion into my life. But living in the 18th century with laws based on a life span of 40 years or so and totally obsolete technology is ridiculous.
But the point is simply that he has no chance of being elected.

So you choose to live in the 17th century and prior, where the rule of the day is subjugation of the people by Big Government, Norm?
Freedom was the rare exception, Norm, up to the 18th century. And Freedom doesn’t have an expiration date, except in the minds of wanna-be dictators and their ignorant followers.

The fact that I’ve heard several of the board Liberals dissing Freedom as some sort of Primitive policy, tells me a couple of things:
1) It is obviously a manipulative propaganda effort that is being spread by Controlling Progressives to sway those with weak minds.
2) It is a tacit admission by the Progressives that they disdain the concept of Freedom, even though many of the Progressive Leaders use the word frequently to manipulate ignorant citizens into accepting their dictatorial rule which is anything BUT Freedom.

Don’t let them kid you, Folks. Socialism, the stepping stone to Communism (Karl Marx), which Progressives adore, has been a failure wherever it has been fully practiced.
See here for real-life experience with Big Government Meddling. Look up the Economic figures for those with the Biggest Governments (bottom of list), and see for yourselves what Bigger Government brings to ordinary citizens’ lives:
http://heritage.org/index/ranking

Neither of my senators are up for reelection, one is democrat and one is republican – given the choice I vote against BOTH of them. However, at least the democrat responds when I write, the republican has NEVER responded. I would be interested in hearing other peoples experience when writing their senators.

My congressman is a democrat and I would not vote against him. In my opinion, he has voted correctly on every issue that I have written to express concern. NDAA not only did he vote against it, he wrote formal complaint to congress about it.

You have this point ight. That is why we continue to have so many idiots and losers in congress. We need a total revamping of the cngressional system. Starting with term limits. Then end the lifetime pension for them and make them participate in Social Security and not have their own special program.Then wwee also need campaign reform including Make it that only registered votercan contribute 0only to a candidate. and only a limited amount like $ 1000. No corprate money no PACs no party money and ever contributer must be reported or they are penalized the amount. These changes with force them to talk about issues not not waste money on the smear campaigns since they will not have so much money to waste.

“what do you think the % is of people here voting against the incumbent if it would mean voting for a Democrat? How many do you think will vote against the incumbent if he/she is “primaried”? And how many do you think are talking smack and will vote for the incumbent because ‘they’re doing a good job and it’s everyone else’s Rep/Sen that are the fault” ?”

There is only maybe 4 to 7% of Livingston’s audience that would vote for a Democrat under any circumstance. Most are hardwired GOP regardless what they say, there is nothing independent about them. 96 to 93% will vote for whom ever the GOP offers them and willing to hold their nose.

The Libertarians do not actually have a viable “party” , they are a scattered few that oppose government in most of it’s manifested forms, the true Utopian it seems as they call you the Utopian. lol! Seeming to suggest we might all be free to blaze trails like Charles Goodnight driving his herd to market. In this day and time as romantic and appealing as that might seem, Libertarian principals most problematic in application today. They can speak of it all day but actually applying it another matter in a Nation of 327 million people and a land mass of 36 million 18,780 thousand sq mi. and only half of them paying Federal taxes. Barbwire and right of ways are things we can’t ignore and there a lot more of both today.

I’d like to think that you and I and some of the others have made some difference with our activity here, if so ~ it’s been marginal at best and hard fought. But as Ron Paul has shown us, don’t get discouraged with poor results. Worthy opposition makes us only stronger.

Unfortunately the harder you bear down on many of them, the more they retreat into name calling and demagoguery and nothing gets solved, understood and little is gained. If you lucky they will supply you a link to their favorite Grue that been feeding their head.

This is little more then Mining, going through material by the tonnage to extract precious ounces of knowledge. It’s slow digging but I’ve enjoyed some of they eminently and learned so things in the process.

DeerInHeadlights makes one of his usual ignorant statements — “The Libertarians do not actually have a viable “party” , they are a scattered few that oppose government in most of it’s manifested forms, the true Utopian it seems as they call you the Utopian. lol!”
From Mirriam Webster:
Utopia: A place of ideal perfection, especially in laws, government, and social conditions.

How would one achieve “perfection”? Even if possible, only by Force. People aren’t perfect, and that’s exactly what Libertarians recognize. Therefore we know that Government people aren’t perfect and could never be expected to know what’s best for the rest of us. That’s why we see the futility in Big Government. They not only CAN’T know what’s best for the rest of us, but the inclination in Leadership is to grow their Power and Perks, so being the ordinary human beings that they are, they are going to concentrate on feathering their own nests first at the expense of the rest of us.
Unlike starry-eyed ignorant Liberals, we Libertarians understand the reality of the human condition. So we advocate simple and few laws that the vast majority of people would understand and obey, instead of the complex laws which most people aren’t even aware of and aren’t likely to obey anyway — Like ignorant Liberals advocate. And we advocate much smaller Government that the people can keep an eye on, unlike the Gargantuan Corrupt Government that thrives on the control instincts of ignorant people.

“How would one achieve “perfection”? Even if possible, only by Force”

David what on Gods green earth makes you so sure about that? Where did you get that idea? where did it come from? Did you read that somewhere or come up with it on your own?

I’ll offer more attention to you response tomorrow.

I get that idea, DeerInHeadlights, because my eyes are wide-open to reality. How else do you get a population of people with different skill-sets, different aspirations, different needs, and different efforts to abide by the same unnecessary rules that they don’t agree with? All the Propanda in the world won’t accomplish that goal, only the Force of Big Government.

Propaganda.

“Propaganda.” ???? ~ It’s called “Dominion” David.

You will serve somebody in you efforts ~ or in spite of your efforts to serve yourself David.

Where it’s my propaganda or your propaganda or someone else’s, it’s still propaganda , the selling to manifested a reality.

I understand that you hate the fact that you must serve somebody besides yourself but Ayn Rand is not here to help you see that as even a remote possibility. Someone will benefit from your activities, ambitions, achievements, desires and even your final demise. The only uncertainly is “whom” David.

But this “notion” that someone must lose in order for there to be a winner is a mental sickness that seem to have overwhelmed and over taken so many of us today.

There is nothing odd or strange about a win/win situation, it’s rooted in notions of equitable fairness and found in the foundation of free enterprise. What seems to be happening today is “equitable fairness” is being replaced with extortion. Too big to fail, to remove the parasite, we place the “host” in Jeopardy. We are being sold a disease on the cheap while the cure much more costly. Trapped! held hostage by a prison of our own making.

It does not really matter who steals your money David, government or corporate greed. The end results is much the same. The money end up in the same pockets at the end of the day.

But David, your “reality” is just that ~ “Yours”. Government is bad! God is bad! sure! of course ! you get no argument from me. At any given moment we’ve all felt that way at times but neither one is going away. Learning how to react to God and government serves us best. They both want dominion, they will have dominion while I trust neither anymore then necessary. I ask for little help and that’s usually what I get, accepting it as maybe more then I actually deserve.

You are entitled too and deserve whatever “reality” you have created for yourself. What ever your wildest dreams and imagination perceive and can construct. But don’t attempt to tell all of us, that you David have the final say in what “reality” is and is not.

Why limit others with your lacking while suggesting it’s infinite and absolute while clearly it’s purely academic.

Where you surrender dominion or not is no skin off my nose, but unless you are completely mad, you will one day accept that your already have and your argument superfluous null and void.

No one here has spoken thoughts of perfection but you and those that employ the term Utopia. It’s only you and your like minded friends that use this “label” and for you and your friends to stand accountable for the use of it.

There is no one here who needs to defend it’s use but you and your friend.

Deer…i’m so looking forward to pres. obama meeting Mitt in the debates. Especially the foreign policy debate. All obama has to say is “OK Mitt…we know what i did, what would you have done differently?” and Romney is toast. Take the available options and the path taken by this administration…what were the alternatives? Without the Stimulus and had we gone the way of austerity to combat the free falling economy and developing recession…we would have dove into a Depression or followed the path of Europe…and they ain’t doing to well right now as we all know. Libya/ oh yeah…i can see Romney preaching how we should have let Qaddafi remian in power to continue to threaten us via supporting terrorists and holding oil out as a weapon. China? OK Mitt…you tell us. LOL Iran? You can’t ratchet down the sanctions any further than what they are and we’re messin’ with their computers so much they had to shut down their one oil export refinery. N’ Korea? ummmm…the last parade they had fake missile on parade and the last four rockets blew up. Immigration? illegal immigration has DROPPED and deportation INCREASED.

yep….the debates are gonna be fun to watch.

HOW do you explain Obummer’s prolonged, SUSTAINED silence, comrade bj? Kinda hard, isn’t it? By the way, comrade, your utopian pants are down around your ankles – again.

Who is the “Utopian”? The person that wants Government as it was before Edison invented the light bulb or the man that accepts the fact that people tend to offer their prettiest face to the most flattering light?

Of the two men, only one is clearly a “Dreamer”

Flashy 2 points that prove once again you are talking through your hat. First was a little fiasco called Fast and Furious, which was concieved to push for more gun control laws but blew up in Holder and Obama’s face. but has gotten stonewalled and swept under the rug. and second, As far as the instant communication over coming big money Abama out spent McCain almost double in 2008please try to get your lips off Obama’s ass.

Rick….Fast and furious was implemented under the Bush II/Cheney regime. though one can fault this administration for not discovering it sooner and ending it before it blew up, most of the buying and selling occurred during the prior admin and the program was in place before this admin. you wouldn’t be accusing the GOP of being anti-gun now are you?

Second…most of Obama’s money came from small donors and the 2008 election didn’t require candidates to have their own “pet billionaire” … as well…the Super Pacs and the so-called non-profits funded by money from who knows where and in what amount wasn’t prevalent as Citizen’s United hadn’t taken full effect then.

One question Rick…how does Fast and Furious indicate this administration is anti-gun?

Flashy says, “Second…most of Obama’s money came from small donors

What constitutes a “small donor”? If we consider any donations $200 or less as a ‘small donor’, because The Federal Election Commission rules say that someone who gives this amount does not need to publicly disclose their name, address, occupation and employer… then that amounts to only 34%, which is certainly not ‘most’ of Obama’s money. While Obama did receive more from small donors that any other candidate during the 2008 election, ‘most’ of it was not received from “small donors”. His top contributors, however, did make up the bulk of ‘Obama’s money’, which are as follows.

University of California $1,648,685
Goldman Sachs $1,013,091
Harvard University $878,164
Microsoft Corp $852,167
Google Inc $814,540
JPMorgan Chase & Co $808,799
Citigroup Inc $736,771
Time Warner $624,618
Sidley Austin LLP $600,298
Stanford University $595,716
National Amusements Inc $563,798
WilmerHale LLP $550,668
Columbia University $547,852
Skadden, Arps et al $543,539
UBS AG $532,674
IBM Corp $532,372

Also, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics Obama received just under $1 million from employees of Goldman Sachs.

Flashy says, “the Super Pacs and the so-called non-profits … … wasn’t prevalent as Citizen’s United hadn’t taken full effect then.”

This statement has no implications to support your assertion, because according to Federal Election Commission advisories, super PACs are not allowed to coordinate directly with candidates or political parties, and Citizens United only removed restrictions of independent political expenditures by corporations and unions, which has nothing to do with direct contributions from what I can see.

Flashy says, “(such as this administration being anti-gun…that claim is so false it is laughable)”

“I just want you to know that we are working on [gun control]. We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar,” President Obama told Sarah Brady, the former president of the Brady Campaign, last spring.

From his own mouth, it doesn’t seem so laughable, does it?

Flashman says — “Rick….Fast and furious was implemented under the Bush II/Cheney regime”.
Implemented? That’s funny, doesn’t Conceived come before Implemented?
http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2011/07/lawmakers-grill-fast-and-furious-supervisors/

Flashman, do you have any shame at all?
It’s no wonder you have no credibility on this board.

Here’s another:
http://www.economist.com/node/21543183

But even if Flashman was being honest and the operation “Fast and Furious” was conceived in the Bush Administration, It would be even less likely that the chief law enforcement officer of the land, Eric Holder, would not have become aware of it.
Apparently, Holder has about as much integrity as our board Sociopath, Flashman.