Can you honestly say that you're satisfied with how taxes are collected and spent in this country? While I acknowledge that some taxes are necessary to fund basic and necessary functions of government, what we have now is a complete disaster; both wasteful and inefficient. Even after taxes have been collected we have a government that tries to do too much, does most of it poorly and spends way too much doing it. In my opinion we receive very poor value for those monies and yeah it makes me angry. If you're not dissatisfied with this state of affairs then you're either not paying attention or your standards are very low. Given your coarse language and snarky remarks, it's probably a mixture of both, hmmm?
It doesn't take a sharp mind or a keen understanding of anything to know that if society is not maintained then it crumbles.
Private property is maintained. The commons is not. If you dislike crumbling things then privatize them and you will see how well maintained they can be when a private owner is there to look after them.
Maybe you're just a selfish fuck.
Says the progressive handing me their invoice for no services rendered.
Basic grammar not withstanding, I think that it has something to do with the fact that the right answers in economics are often subtle and counter intuitive while the easy and obvious answers, which are the sort frequently offered by the left, are both seductive and wrong in ways that are subtle and not immediately obvious until the failure becomes painful in the extreme, as it has for example in Venezuela today. So to answer your question, it takes a sharp mind and a keen understanding of both economics and history to make a proper defense of free enterprise and individual liberty against the progressive polemics offered by the left in defense of dependency and redistribution as the path to prosperity. Clearly, not everyone who takes up that mantle is equal to the task.
I know it's fashionable to blame Detroit's problems on the Evil Tax And Spend Democrats
It's fashionable because it's largely true. Detroit followed the advice of left wing Democrats and progressives religiously for decades, even as other areas which were also affected by NAFTA and globalization adapted and reinvented themselves into new industries while diversifying their economic bases. Detroit stubbornly refused to do either of these things, instead proudly asserting their God given liberal right to a standard of living which they could no longer afford and expecting somebody else to pay for it. Well, now the crows have come home to roost in Detroit and I don't feel sorry for them one bit. Detroit will be an abject lesson in what it means to live within your means and the folly of expecting others to pay for your stubbornness and extravagance.
Well, that's the price of a stable and progressive civilization.
Why is it that whenever progressives talk about the price of something I'm the one who gets handed the bill for their profligate ways?
It was probably for the best. Just curious though, did the Democratic party actually give you any support or was it one of those non-competitive districts where a Democrat hasn't won in decades? There are plenty of districts like that all over the United States where either the Democratic or Republican party is happy to let local candidates who are halfway presentable run on the off chance that one of them might actually win, but they rarely put any serious resources into those races other than offering advice on how to respond to questions along party lines and moral support.
I never want to be stuck in a job where my supervisor is an opinionated moron again.
Short of being self employed, there's no guarantee of that. Hell, even if you are self employed there's no guarantee of that.
China is not only going through an industrial revolution, but also a technocratic and political revolution.
China is already industrialized and the Communist Party remains firmly in control. I wouldn't call that a revolution. If anything it's a challenge to the United States and the Washington Consensus of how economies grow and prosper. It says to the rest of the developing world that you can have economic growth and prosperity without the chaos and inefficiency of democracy. That's the real danger of China, not their budding military or industrial might. They make good arguments for results based growth that Obama and others in the west have been slow to respond to with mostly unsatisfying answers. Obama meanwhile seams content to preside over the decline of American power, ruining by his disastrous policies many of our foreign policy achievements since the end of WWII. I've liked few enough Presidents in my time thus far, but Obama is the first one in my opinion to deliberately seek to undermine the nation that he swore to protect and lead.
It's more complicated than that. China has hundreds of millions of people all desperately struggling to pull themselves up into the middle class. They know how Americans, Europeans and their successful Chinese peers live because it's in their faces every day through ubiquitous advertising and ostentatious public displays of wealth. They want the trappings of that consumer lifestyle so badly that they don't care what they have to do to get them. Who wants to be the one to tell them, "no you can't have that because it will ruin the environment"? Against these base desires of human nature, no amount of logic or reasoning about consequences can prevail.
Well, that 20,000 square foot gym and aquatic center with 2 Olympic sized lap and diving pools wasn't built for free you know, and all of those brand new buildings, designed by world class architects no less, also cost money to build. Then you have the brad new student center with the gourmet food court, luxury spa and other resort type amenities. All of this designed to appeal to the spoiled and narcissistic undergraduates who attend these 4 year vacation destinations, financed by taxpayer backed loans, and whine when they have to work hard and pay them back after they leave school, with or without a degree. A big part of why college cost less for our parents' generation was less government financing, with the exception of the GI Bill which was limited to veterans, and more spartan facilities designed to be minimalist and functional, not luxurious and indulgent.
Maduro wants no possibility of an Arab spring or Ukraine revolt
Cutting off the Internet didn't save the pre-revolution Egyptian Government and it won't save Maduro either. It's a sign of weakness.
How is it that Maduro and his allies can continue to persist with economic policies so patently stupid that even an undergraduate student of economics at any American or European university can predict and explain their inevitable failures? I mean bare supermarket shelves in a country with some of the largest oil reserves in the Southern Hemisphere? That's humiliating. How can Maduro possibly explain this with a straight face other than to admit that currency controls and confiscation of private property for redistribution to his supporters is not the way forward to economic prosperity? Don't they realize that the American and European financiers are laughing at them even now? What a bunch of balloon heads. Why don't Venezuelans living abroad, especially economists, call them out? A public shaming of Maduro and his cronies might achieve what street protests and violence have so far failed to deliver, a return to economic sanity in Venezuela.