JustChristian
New Member
Dragoon68 said:Obama is rich. He's one of the ones he talks about! Now let's see if he becomes poor in order to help the poor.
Helping the poor is not why we have a federal government. If they were any good at it the problem would have been solved generations ago. We can take care of the really poor a whole lot better in the private sector. There aren't that many really poor people in America compared to some corners of the world. There are a whole lot of people who who are just average - isn't that the meaning of an average - want to become rich. That's what motivates them to work hard, to save, to invest, to take risks, and to keep trying. Some will make it and some will not. It's not the government's business to do that for us.
Politicians have been using the "we've got to help the poor" line for generation after generation and it's totally bogus. They don't help anything by getting people onto the government payroll - directly or indirectly.
Yes, the infrastructure - roads, railroads, airports, etc. - is always in need of work. The more of it that's done with private money the better. The parts of it that "must" be done by government because there's no reasonable way to extract a profit doing it should be handled at the lowest level of government possible. The less the federal government has to do with it the better. Their meddling always creates some kind of unfair advantage for one group or another and props up concepts that would otherwise fail. The tons on public money spent for roads actually encourages the problems we face with transportation. We just keep building an infrastructure based on private automobiles and think it's free. The tons of public money for waterways in another one. Let the users and consumers pay for what they need and it will regulate itself to the most efficient and least costly solutions.
Jobs are owned by employers. Workers own the skills to do the jobs. Government really has neither since it just skims productivity from the rest of us albeit some for essential services that it was designed to do such as law enforcement and military defense. But the best way to improve the economy and to create jobs is to let people with money have at making more money. They'll invest it is ideas that work. They'll own the jobs resulting from their ideas create but they'll need workers to accomplish their plans. They can't do it without workers. Government, on the other hand, just robs good talent from the private sector. For every government employee or every government project there has to be several private sector employees making real goods and services in exchange for real cash to pay for the government's foolishness.
This is what Obamanites just don't understand and probably never will. Or maybe they do but like the comfort of government based jobs because it gives them a comfortable life.
Nobody in government is really poor. Most of our representatives are talented, highly educated men and women who could make a lot more money in private business. Do you think George Bush isn't rich?
Not having any government, which you seem to be arguing for, is something called anarchy. So, you can have a democratic form of government or some other kind. Are you saying we need another kind of government? If not they why not suggest ideas that will improve our form of government rather than tear it down?
Of course if we had anarchy we wouldn't have an army or war and that wopuld be good. However, we wouldn't have police or fire protection and that wouldn't be so good. On the other hand all the NRA types would get to really use their guns, often at least for a little while.