Quantcast

How Small Gov't Can Go Horribly Wrong

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,138
16,537
Riding the baggage carousel.
What's going on here is that the people are so anti-tax that they're basically ruining their city...
:thumb:

I imagine Pesqueeb's hood will learn its lesson before too long.
My, aren't you quite the optimist?

I don't think the current situation in Colorado Springs will become a trend or last very long,
You clearly know nothing about the people of this town. There are a large number of people here who either a: don't see any problems at all and in fact still think city government is too big, or b: if they do recognize the city fiscal crisis, its clearly all the fault of Obama, feminists, and/or fags. But not to worry, because Jebus is coming.
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
Burly, you forgot to add fear of the black/brown man to the conservative agenda.
That's probably the case alot of the time, but I was just trying to address the "small government" question at hand. Like I said, I actually think there is some validity to the idea of decentralized government. Imagine how much more progressive certain regions of the country would be if polticians across the country weren't beholden to southern baptist standards of moral purity.
Of course, the opposite is also true... the south would probably still at least be segregated.
Edit: And these idiots forget that it was "big government" that brought them out of squalor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_Valley_Authority#History


The colonies only originally united in self-defense, and the original 13 might still be pretty closely aligned socially speaking. That the country has expanded in size and population (what 20 times?) to include various regions, religions, values, etc. might doom it. Thomas Jefferson didn't have any idea he was writing rules to govern what exists today.
 
Last edited:

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
That's probably the case alot of the time, but I was just trying to address the "small government" question at hand. Like I said, I actually think there is some validity to the idea of decentralized government. Imagine how much more progressive certain regions of the country would be if polticians across the country weren't beholden to southern baptist standards of moral purity.
Of course, the opposite is also true... the south would probably still at least be segregated.
Edit: And these idiots forget that it was "big government" that brought them out of squalor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_Valley_Authority#History


The colonies only originally united in self-defense, and the original 13 might still be pretty closely aligned socially speaking. That the country has expanded in size and population (what 20 times?) to include various regions, religions, values, etc. might doom it. Thomas Jefferson didn't have any idea he was writing rules to govern what exists today.
The problem is that what starts out as a reasonable theory (states rights vs the Fed) gets completely blown out of proportion and becomes "(all) government is bad". It doesn't matter whether it's local government funding for schools, or federal government spending on infrastructure, ALL of it is reprehensible. Which is an idea I could understand (although not agree with) if they were at least consistent. All military spending is good. More military spending would be even better. More laws/police/prisons are good. Government funding of private enterprises is good (school vouchers, insurance vouchers). It's so selective that you can't even claim that they're libertarian (ie, Ron Paul), they're just bat**** crazy. Not because they believe this stuff, but because it's incomprehensible how they justify calling ANY of this as "fiscally responsible".

They're willing to drive the country into debt to avoid paying for ANY social programs they don't want. It's a theory called "starve the beast", where instead of starting with cutting social programs, you start with tax cuts to starve the government of its funding. Then when the government is broke and people are clamoring for fiscal responsibility, the conservatives come in and slash social spending, which people will accept due to the fact that the government is broke.

Running a surplus is a conservative's greatest fear, and you can see exactly how FAST they acted to kill it after GWB was elected in 2000. The calls then were for tax cuts to "give the people back their money". Basically in times of surplus you have to cut taxes to allow people to spend their own money as they want (you can probably see where I'm going with this). However, several years later as our budget surplus had turned into a deficit, the call was for, you guessed it, MORE TAX CUTS. The rationale then (as now) was that you need to have tax cuts when you're running a deficit so that you can stimulate the economy and bring in more money (Laffer BS). I'm sorry, you can't have it both ways. You can't justify tax cuts when you're running a surplus and then keep calling for tax cuts when you're running a deficit.

:mad:

So yes, these "fiscal conservatives" are really nothing more than dip**** crazies who want to starve the government of funds so it can't pay the social programs that they disagree with. And they're going to run the economy and the country into the gutter to achieve it. :rant:
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
Want a laugh? Greenspan talking about the perils of Zero Debt Society... Basically paying off our debt would be a *bad* thing.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/testimony/2001/20010302/default.htm

The most recent projections from OMB and CBO indicate that, if current policies remain in place, the total unified surplus will reach about $800 billion in fiscal year 2010, including an on-budget surplus of almost $500 billion. Moreover, the admittedly quite uncertain long-term budget exercises released by the CBO last October maintain an implicit on-budget surplus under baseline assumptions well past 2030 despite the budgetary pressures from the aging of the baby-boom generation, especially on the major health programs.
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,180
17
TN
I could understand (although not agree with) if they were at least consistent. All military spending is good. More military spending would be even better. More laws/police/prisons are good.
Yeah, I find it interesting how these teabagger types are always going on about government infringement on their freedom, and they waive the Gadsden flag as a symbol... yet the big government efforts they do tend to support... huge military and intelligence, legislation of morality, greater police presence, Patriot Act type legislation (wire tapping, book tracking, torture, racial profiling, secret prisons overseas)... would seemingly send us down the road of a police state. Makes little sense to me.
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
Want a laugh? Greenspan talking about the perils of Zero Debt Society... Basically paying off our debt would be a *bad* thing.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/testimony/2001/20010302/default.htm

The most recent projections from OMB and CBO indicate that, if current policies remain in place, the total unified surplus will reach about $800 billion in fiscal year 2010, including an on-budget surplus of almost $500 billion. Moreover, the admittedly quite uncertain long-term budget exercises released by the CBO last October maintain an implicit on-budget surplus under baseline assumptions well past 2030 despite the budgetary pressures from the aging of the baby-boom generation, especially on the major health programs.
At zero debt, the continuing unified budget surpluses now projected under current law imply a major accumulation of private assets by the federal government. Such an accumulation would make the federal government a significant factor in our nation's capital markets and would risk significant distortion in the allocation of capital to its most productive uses. Such a distortion could be quite costly, as it is our extraordinarily effective allocation process that has enabled such impressive increases in productivity and standards of living despite a relatively low domestic saving rate.
Yup, paying off debt is bad and irresponsible. Great move, asshole.
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
More conservative humor, this time from 1993:

If enacted, the Clinton plan is sure to backfire. There is no reason to believe that tax-and-spend policies which failed under Jimmy Carter and George Bush will somehow stimulate economic growth under Bill Clinton. Clinton's return to old-fashioned liberal fiscal policy should be a political godsend for Republicans, who now are placed in an enviable win-win situation. At the very least, they can vote against the Clinton tax increase and spend the next couple of years saying "I told you so" while picking off incumbent Democrats who foolishly believed Washington Post "news" reports that people wanted to pay higher taxes.
How these guys have ANY credibility is beyond me.
 

eaterofdog

ass grabber
Sep 8, 2006
8,189
1,431
Central Florida
Want a laugh? Greenspan talking about the perils of Zero Debt Society... Basically paying off our debt would be a *bad* thing.
I am so very glad that me and my wife went to debt consolidation ten years ago and got the vast majority of of our debt paid. Our only debt is car payments (cars "beneath" our income level) and the rest of my wife's student loans (it was a good investment.) We own our house free and clear. At some point, we realized the stress of being owned wasn't worth a bunch of sh1t you don't really need. (Should have listened to my dad, he warned me.) So fvck you Greenspan and fvck your corporate cronies.
 

SkaredShtles

Michael Bolton
Sep 21, 2003
65,376
12,532
In a van.... down by the river
I'm pretty sure Greenspan isn't making any comment on *personal* debt... nobody in their right mind would argue that.

He does have a good point about government involvement in the capital markets being a bad thing. They'd sure-as-$hit fvck things up... :D
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
I'm pretty sure Greenspan isn't making any comment on *personal* debt... nobody in their right mind would argue that.

He does have a good point about government involvement in the capital markets being a bad thing. They'd sure-as-$hit fvck things up... :D
Yeah, it's good thing the US gov't isn't subsidizing Americans putting money into the stock market. You'd end up with the mother of all Ponzi schemes as Americans keep dumping more and more money into the stock market based on the premise that stocks always go up...

Oh wait a second, that's exactly what 401(k)s and IRAs do. :think:
 

skatetokil

Turbo Monkey
Jan 2, 2005
2,383
-1
DC/Bluemont VA
How is this small government gone wrong? They are implementing extremely painful measures to restore fiscal balance after a period of providing public services they couldn't afford and going into debt to do it. That's big government gone wrong if anything. Maybe if they hadn't done so many bond issues to buy build useless crap and expand their administrative apparatus, they wouldn't have to fire the cops and turn out the lights. If they had focused on performing the core functions of government well and cheaply from the outset, they wouldn't be in this mess.
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,138
16,537
Riding the baggage carousel.
How is this small government gone wrong? They are implementing extremely painful measures to restore fiscal balance after a period of providing public services they couldn't afford and going into debt to do it. That's big government gone wrong if anything. Maybe if they hadn't done so many bond issues to buy build useless crap and expand their administrative apparatus, they wouldn't have to fire the cops and turn out the lights. If they had focused on performing the core functions of government well and cheaply from the outset, they wouldn't be in this mess.
Are you dry shaving me?? :mad: This city has never provided sh*t for anybody at anytime. Sure, there are a couple public parks, and we have some cops and some firefighters. There are no publicly funded museums, art centers, there has never been public transportation worth a sh*t, infrastructure is a joke. Those things are core functions and this sh*t hole town can't even properly fund and maintain those things because the sarah palin/jebus is coming tinfoil hat crowd keeps frothing at the mouth about how we need a smaller city government. Christ on a crutch!:rant:
 

skatetokil

Turbo Monkey
Jan 2, 2005
2,383
-1
DC/Bluemont VA
That's an awesome expression.

The politics of the Palin People scare me to death frankly, but I take issue with applying the label "small government" to them. If the government in C Springs needed a bigger budget to run the Hispanics out of town they'd probably be all for it.
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,138
16,537
Riding the baggage carousel.
That's an awesome expression.

The politics of the Palin People scare me to death frankly, but I take issue with applying the label "small government" to them. If the government in C Springs needed a bigger budget to run the Hispanics out of town they'd probably be all for it.
Thank you.
And I bet your right about the Hispanic part.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
85,562
24,182
media blackout
The politics of the Palin People scare me to death frankly, but I take issue with applying the label "small government" to them. If the government in C Springs needed a bigger budget to run the Hispanics out of town they'd probably be all for it.
"small government" is their new racism facade, they realized people caught on to "socialist" as a racist term pretty quick.
 

Squeak

Get your pork here.
Sep 26, 2001
1,546
0
COlo style
Thank you.
And I bet your right about the Hispanic part.
Only the ones that did not serve them their fast food, clean their toilets at the mega church, and pave the driveway's of their homes.

I stay away from the "Springs" if at all possible, and its only 50 miles away.
 

stoney

Part of the unwashed, middle-American horde
Jul 26, 2006
21,519
7,066
Colorado
I think theree is more driver stupidity than city stupidity going on there. This happens on every slight slope hill when it snows. I love the guy in the super duty. He has that 'what a bunch of idiots, this won't slow me down' look, right up until he started going backwards.
 

stevew

resident influencer
Sep 21, 2001
40,494
9,525
most people don't listen when they are told to stay off the fvcking road....
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
I think theree is more driver stupidity than city stupidity going on there. This happens on every slight slope hill when it snows. I love the guy in the super duty. He has that 'what a bunch of idiots, this won't slow me down' look, right up until he started going backwards.
Our city (generally) puts down salt before it starts snowing/freezing. Costs a little bit more, but usually prevents situations like that........
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,138
16,537
Riding the baggage carousel.
I'm glad someone else brought this up. This wasn't even that bad a storm, WTF are people in this town going to do if we ever get a real storm? I went out @ 7:30 last night on a beer and grocery run (more than 3 hours after that video was taped) and I saw zero evidence of plowing or sand/rust accelerator on the road. FWIW I had no problems getting around town. Combine a city too broke to plow its own roads with fvcking idiots and this is what happens.
[coolstorybro] I actually had a small confrontation with a woman @ whole foods who was driving like a retarded cunt, i.e. on the phone in a raging snowstorm driving like an idiot in the parking lot who pulled in the wrong way from the wrong direction and cut me off. She had a "yes on 62" sticker on her car, which for you non locals, was a rabidly right recent ballot measure seeking to claim that zygotes are people. She got out of the car and I told her that I thought she didn't really give a **** about the sanctity of human life because if she did, she wouldn't be driving around in the storm like an asshat while on the fvcking phone. She couldn't figure out why I thought that was retarded. :facepalm: [/coolstorybro]
Wife and I just got back from a trip to our local coffee place and the main streets have been plowed and sand laid but the surface streets are still a disaster. I tried to go over the hill on S. Carefree (the location of said video) but the wife wouldn't let me, the video is making it around on peoples facebook pages and she wasn't having it.
Paper this morning said there were actually two 20+ car accidents yesterday/last night and that city buses were getting stuck everywhere. I was shocked to learn that there were still bus routes at all. Guess there all on the west side because there hasn't been an operating bus route on my side of town for over a year.
 
Last edited:

KavuRider

Turbo Monkey
Jan 30, 2006
2,565
4
CT
most people don't listen when they are told to stay off the fvcking road....
No, they don't.

We have the same problem here when the washes/streets flood during our monsoon storms.
They typically put barricades up when/where they can, but if the street is underwater, that usually means don't drive through it.

They always have some moron who decides to drive around the barricades and sinks their car.
Or the winner who thought he'd be a hero a few years ago and take his H2 across one of the washes. Got about halfway and they had to bring a chopper in to rescue him and his passengers. His H2 wound up about a mile downstream on its roof when the storm ended. And they made him pay for the rescue :thumb:

edit - I feel a little bad laughing at that video, but how stupid can you be? The Super Duty made me cringe, especially when he started dragging 3 other cars back with him.
 

stevew

resident influencer
Sep 21, 2001
40,494
9,525
what was funny was the jeep that made it up without a problem.
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
I'll laugh my ass off if insurance companies tack on a $500 "you live in Colorado Springs" surcharge to everyone's bill. Save $10 on reduced taxes due to not plowing/salting the roads, pay $500 more for car insurance. Sounds about right for all of these "small government conservatives."....
 

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,373
0
SF
Well, I'm not sure it is the government's fault for this one.

One day it will snow again in Socialist Paradise. I live next to a 18 degree road, and I will be there to watch California drivers turn their cars into snowboards.
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
6
Thank god that Colorado Springs is able to cut back spending on things like road salt, and rely on people to take personal responsibility for themselves.......
bloomberg should be proud: we've never used salt.
They should have prayed. Where's your Messiah now, Flanders?
this was *south* carefree. best you'll find is 3rd world mormons. the rest were huddled by uncle ted's
This wasn't even that bad a storm, WTF are people in this town going to do if we ever get a real storm?
i think it was the sudden temp drop that caused severe icing (unusual for this area), and truth be told, i would've been out in it, too. b/c they closed austin bluffs (usually very fun to walk over & point/laugh during storms near rush hr), it just moved my fellow idiots a couple miles south
[coolstorybro] woman @ whole foods who was driving like a retarded cunt, [/coolstorybro]
they're everywhere, eh?
dante said:
I'll laugh my ass off if insurance companies tack on a $500 "you live in Colorado Springs" surcharge to everyone's bill.
they already do, but for hail claims that go collected & unapplied. oh, and i wish people would stop thinking we should know how to drive in this stuff: we're a high plains desert w/ 1/2 the annual snowfall of d.c., and it burns off rather quickly. the only reason i have snow tires is b/c of my hilly neighborhood

i would take offense if this spat of idiocy resulted in siphoning off funds for more legitimate uses. it just rewards bad behavior
 

Inclag

Turbo Monkey
Sep 9, 2001
2,750
439
MA
I'll laugh my ass off if insurance companies tack on a $500 "you live in Colorado Springs" surcharge to everyone's bill. Save $10 on reduced taxes due to not plowing/salting the roads, pay $500 more for car insurance. Sounds about right for all of these "small government conservatives."....
"We help those who already have the means to help themselves" <--- Sounds about right based on that logic.
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,807
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
oh, and i wish people would stop thinking we should know how to drive in this stuff: we're a high plains desert w/ 1/2 the annual snowfall of d.c., and it burns off rather quickly. the only reason i have snow tires is b/c of my hilly neighborhood
NOAA.gov said:
Colorado Springs Annual Snowfall = 42"
Washington Dulles Airport, DC = 22"
Sorry, you were saying?
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
6
hmmm...i must be remembering latent/lingering snow. good catch.

also, i misspelled spate