Text 15593, 122 rader
Skriven 2007-06-22 17:44:27 av lizardgirl (2006.babylon5)
  Kommentar till text 15495 av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated (1908.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: OT: a proposal for increasing teachers' salaries
============================================================
On Jun 18, 4:39 pm, "Carl" <cengm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "lizardgirl" <gab...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:1182183396.409552.248790@n15g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 15, 5:55 pm, "Carl" <cengm...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> "lizardgirl" <gab...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> >>news:1181935812.777819.186880@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> Why would the feds have to give the states the money? The feds could
> >> define standards, but let the states collect the money and administer
> >> the programs.
>
> >> The states already have welfare and health programs. In many cases
> >> there's
> >> overlap.  A number of states are coming up with their own versions of
> >> universal health care.
>
> >> Why do we have to have both federal and state versions?
>
> > there was concern even with the block grants that folks would migrate
> > to states that offered services that better met their needs.  while
> > this didn't happen, it is a real possibility for some percentage of
> > the population.
>
> > i like the idea of the fed setting the standard with the states both
> > controlling the collection and re-allocation of funds (taxes) in
> > support of local programs.  this however puts the entire burden for
> > funding state programs on the state tax base.  no problems if you have
> > a nice 'evenly' distributed population.  problems can occur if, one,
> > your tax base can not support those services or, two, can not met the
> > federal standards.  migration state to state can really have an impact
> > on a state only model.
>
> But states can do other things, such as lower corporate taxes to bring in
> new
> businesses, corporate headquarters, plants, etc.  Create the jobs and
> the people will come/stay.  MN has seen a number of businesses leave because
> the corporate tax rate is so high.  It would be a lot worse if Minnesotans
> didn't like living here so much.
>
> States might even try new ways of implementing programs rather than
> being locked into  the old/marginal programs we have now.


big business to the rescue? :^)  joking aside state would need to be
more proactive in their courtship of 'industry.'  the only real issue
is the effect out sourcing outside of the US will have.  while it's
great for tax revenue to have a corporate headquarters or two feeding
the state treasury, employment may not be effected much.


> > if the fed is going to set the standard does it not then share a social
> > and
> > financial responsibility to see to its implementation?
>
> Why?  The feds define a minimum wage...is it the feds responsibility to
> pay that wage?  The feds define auto gas mileage requirements, are they
> obligated to pay auto makers to make lighter/more dangerous cars?
>
> >> >> I wish we'd spend substantially more on fraud detection and
> >> >> prosecution.
> >> >> Most of our programs have huge amounts of fraud (estimates ranging up
> >> >> from 15-50% depending on the program).
>
> >> > is there welfare fraud?  sure.  but the system needs to be smarter,
> >> > less vulnerable to abuse.
>
> >> There seems to be very little effort to do that though.
>
> > which seems like a great opportunity for policy makers to demonstrate
> > their worth.
>
> LOL.  How long have you been practicing your stand-up act? :)
>


me, just a few years.  the act has, however, been passed down
breadwinner to first born since the time of ceasar.


> >> >> To the degree that we can all be convinced to work for the common
> >> >> good,
> >> >> that's great.  Freedom is lost whenever someone is compelled though.
>
> >> > yes and no.  there are shades of grey there.  taxes being one of
> >> > them. :^)
>
> >> Sure, there are shades of gray...and everyone weighs them differently.
>
> >> I had a conversation recently in which it was argued that the feds should
> >> do
> >> those things that it can do best/most efficiently.
>
> >> If you want to be the most efficient, have a dictatorship. Of course that
> >> efficiency comes at the cost of freedom.  I add that cost when weighing
> >> those shades of gray.  Others are predisposed to wanting the
> >> feds to have the power and are much less critical.
>
> >> The more power the feds have, the more ability they have to inflict
> >> a single (politically correct) view of how you should live your life.
>
> > i agree (love the quotes :^).  i see very little difference between a
> > pure democracy (which we are not) and communism.  its wrong, i think,
> > to look for *freedom* in the form of govenment, any government.
>
> ----
> "America wasn't founded so that we could all be better. America was founded
> so we could all be anything we damn well please."
> -- P.J. O'Rourke


yes, 'be' anything, not 'do' anything.

lg
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)