Who cares who they got their cost estimates from? When the government decides to do something like the Big Dig, they are, for all intents and purposes, the general contractor and, as such, have responsibility for costs AND cost over runs. If you were an owner who had a project being built for you and your general contractor came to you and said that the project was going to cost you five times what he quoted you, what would you say?
What government agencies would you characterize as efficient? The DOE? Not even close. For all of the billions they have spent and MISPLACED, they have had little or no positive effect on outcome. Government bureaucracies are a malignant cancer and WILL kill us if they aren't stopped. On Mar 2, 3:24 pm, Hollywood <jims29...@gmail.com> wrote: > Zeb, > > Who did the govt. get their cost estimates from? Who profited from the > cost overuns? > How many guesses would you like? > > On Mar 2, 12:30 pm, Zebnick <zebn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > What in the wide wide world of sports would make you think that ANY > > entity could be more corrupt, incompetent and wasteful than the > > government? What government agency does a lot and costs little? More > > typical is The Big Dig in Boston, costing many times its initial > > estimated cost. Or the hole in the ground, ten years later, where the > > World Trade Center used to be. > > > On Mar 2, 12:32 pm, Hollywood <jims29...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > frankg, > > > > In the recent 2008 national elections the Dems and Repubs recieved 98% > > > of all votes cast. ALL the Independents and other parties combined > > > only recieved just 2% of the votes cast. > > > > Corporations will steal even more and do it faster with even less > > > recourse available to the citizens. Read the lasr sentance of my > > > previous post and feel free to refute it, if able. > > > > On Mar 2, 9:36 am, frankg <fran...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hollywood, > > > > > OK, we're in agreement on your first point. I've been supporting 3rd > > > > party candidates for years. But as I commented above, Congress makes > > > > the rules for Congress, and our system is designed to ensure the two > > > > parties dominate. I'm game for any changes that can level the playing > > > > field. The reforms you suggest would be a good start but I believe > > > > more would be needed to give 3rd party candidates a chance. > > > > > I agree changes need to be made to our health care system but I don't > > > > believe nationalizing it will work. I simply do not trust the > > > > government to run anything and do it well. Medicare is a fraction of > > > > what's being proposed and is a financial disaster. I wonder how many > > > > examples of government incompetence, corruption and ineffectiveness is > > > > required before people stop believing government is the way to solve > > > > our problems. > > > > > On Mar 1, 9:45 pm, Hollywood <jims29...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > frankg, > > > > > > Real simple. BOTH major parties are corrupt beyond belief. You get to > > > > > vote for the candidates THEY put on the ballot and the media, both > > > > > conservative and liberal, simply ignore candidates that are NOT from > > > > > the two major parties. > > > > > > One start would be taxpayer funding of state and national candidates. > > > > > Put the money in a pool to be divided equally amoung ALL candidates > > > > > that meet certain qualifications to run for state or national offices. > > > > > NO corporate OR private contributions of ANY sort. Enough of "the guy > > > > > who has the most money to spend wins", let the candidates win or lose > > > > > on their ideas and accomplishments and let the candidates from the > > > > > smaller parties have the same to spend as from the two major ones. > > > > > > We have the world's most expensive health care, yet far from the best. > > > > > Time to try something different. > > > > > > On Mar 1, 8:02 pm, frankg <fran...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hollywood, > > > > > > > And where are these mythical 'better people' supposed to come from? > > > > > > Are better people campaigning against the crooks and just never > > > > > > managing to win? > > > > > > > Yep, sure do. How about we get rid of DHS *and* not do government > > > > > > healthcare. That would be a great start. > > > > > > > On Mar 1, 7:19 pm, Hollywood <jims29...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > frankg, > > > > > > > > #1 Already answered that comment. Elect better people. > > > > > > > > #2 Same answer as above. > > > > > > > > #3 How about we trade DHS for Nationalized Health Care? You DO > > > > > > > understand, don't you, that DHS vastly increased the size of the > > > > > > > govt.? > > > > > > > > On Mar 1, 5:53 pm, frankg <fran...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hollywood, > > > > > > > > > > "Elect better people, restore the checks and balances in > > > > > > > > > government." > > > > > > > > > Checks and balances are built into the system but they no > > > > > > > > longer work. > > > > > > > > Government has gotten way to big and that breeds corruption. > > > > > > > > > > "Never let anyone, or any group, obtain too much power and/or > > > > > > > > > retain it for too long." > > > > > > > > > Interesting concept considering Congress makes up the rules for > > > > > > > > Congress. > > > > > > > > > > "Did I say anything about MORE govt. involvement? No, I think > > > > > > > > > not." > > > > > > > > > Of course you want more government involvement -- you support > > > > > > > > government healthcare. > > > > > > > > > On Mar 1, 5:30 pm, Hollywood <jims29...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > frankg, > > > > > > > > > > Elect better people, restore the checks and balances in > > > > > > > > > government. > > > > > > > > > Never let anyone, or any group, obtain too much power and/or > > > > > > > > > retain it > > > > > > > > > for too long. We get the govt. that we are willing to > > > > > > > > > tolerate. WE are > > > > > > > > > responsible for the govt. we have, there is no one to blame > > > > > > > > > except > > > > > > > > > ourselves. > > > > > > > > > Did I say anything about MORE govt. involvement? No, I think > > > > > > > > > not. > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 1, 3:55 pm, frankg <fran...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hollywood, > > > > > > > > > > > Two problems with this; > > > > > > > > > > > - When and where does it end. Government continues to > > > > > > > > > > expand and is > > > > > > > > > > now fully self perpetuating. Someone has to step up and > > > > > > > > > > state the > > > > > > > > > > obvious – it has to stop. 2.5 million employees.. come on! > > > > > > > > > > > - The agencies that exist today are not particularly > > > > > > > > > > effective in any > > > > > > > > > > of what you claim they do. We’re getting cheated today by > > > > > > > > > > corporations > > > > > > > > > > making bad decisions and with no accountability. Our air > > > > > > > > > > and water > > > > > > > > > > quality continues to decline. And our sons and daughters > > > > > > > > > > are dying in > > > > > > > > > > wars fought for corporate profit. > > > > > > > > > > > The problem is we have a society that more and more looks to > > > > > > > > > > government to do everything for them and government is > > > > > > > > > > notoriously > > > > > > > > > > ineffective at getting anything done. We need less > > > > > > > > > > government > > > > > > > > > > involvement, not more, and we need to be better at holding > > > > > > > > > > government > > > > > > > > > > accountable for what we do ask of it. > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 1, 2:16 pm, Hollywood <jims29...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > MJ, > > > > > > > > > > > > Key word in Mr. Madison's quote is "impartially". Tell > > > > > > > > > > > me, just what > > > > > > > > > > > agency is ABLE to hold Corporations responsible and > > > > > > > > > > > LIABLE for their > > > > > > > > > > > actions if not state and/or Federal govt.? You propose a > > > > > > > > > > > dictatorship > > > > > > > > > > > of the Corporations? No recourse to their decisions, no > > > > > > > > > > > accountability? Does the citizen have a right to be not > > > > > > > > > > > cheated? Do I > > > > > > > > > > > have a right to breathe clean air, drink clean water? Do > > > > > > > > > > > I have a > > > > > > > > > > > right to not have sons die in wars fought for Corporate > > > > > > > > > > > profits? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 1, 12:46 pm, "M. Johnson" <micha...@america.net> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hollwood > > > > > > > > > > > > No need for the ATF, DOT or DOE? Are you kidding? > > > > > > > > > > > > > MJ > > > > > > > > > > > > A whole lot more can be abolished than those ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is it you imagine government should do? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regard$, > > > > > > > > > > > > --MJ > > > > > > > > > > > > > Government is instituted to protect property > > > > > > > > > > > > of every sort; as well that which lies in the > > > > > > > > > > > > various rights of individuals, as that which > > > > > > > > > > > > the term particularly expresses. This being > > > > > > > > > > > > the end of government, that alone is a just > > > > > > > > > > > > government which impartially secures to every > > > > > > > > > > > > man whatever is his own. -- James Madison- Hide quoted > > > > > > > > > > > > text - > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
