FredHayek wrote: Give a man a fish and you feed him for one day, but teach a man to fish and you make the man independent.
Is there any reason we can't do both?
Not at all, which makes it all the more curious that we haven't been doing both for quite some time. In exchange for the public charity some useful work should be done to the benefit of those providing the public charity, don't you think? Isn't that how Red Rocks got built as well as the structures in the Denver Mtn Parks? What useful results do we see from extending unemployment benefits for 99 weeks? Why shouldn't we expect that in exchange for federal spending that the public will receive a Red Rocks Amphitheater that all will benefit from using, not only in times of difficulty for all, but as a general principle that is followed in good times as well as in bad?
Why should individual welfare be a federal concern instead of a State one? Are not the legislators and executive of this State in a better position to know and understand what would be most beneficial for the citizens of this State than the 55 representatives from California, the 34 from Texas, the 29 each from New York and Florida, the rest of the Congress critters and President Obama are? Do you think that the citizens of Colorado are more or less concerned with the welfare of their neighbors than they are the welfare of the citizens of California and visa versa?
What the federal government has proven beyond any doubt to nearly everyone over the last 70 or so years is that it is a very poor steward of the funds provided by the taxes it levies. It has failed miserably over that time to address and solve the poverty problem despite a "War on Poverty" that has been waged for going on 60 years now. Our education system is less robust than it was before Jimmy Carter and Congress created the Department of Education. Federal intervention in the form of Pell Grants and guaranteed student loans have escalated college costs at a rate that is significantly greater than the rate of inflation to the point where a middle class family is no longer able to afford to send their children to college without incurring a large debt in the process. Anything related to individual welfare operated by the federal government has become more expensive and less effective over time, is this not sufficient enough for us to realize that federal control is not only not desirable but detrimental?
BearMtnHIB wrote: Everyone seems to like to hear the guy who is saying what people want to hear, even the press appears to prefer “feel good” analysis to considering the accuracy of his record.
:rofl Saying that pumping money into the hands of people that will imeadiatly spend it wont help the economy is like saying water won't help put out a fire...
The dumbest thing you guys have ever said.... the very dumbest thing I've ever heard here is that "The stimulus didn't work"...Like water on a fire, it can't do anything but work. rofllol Wow
