Rumack, Randy: [together] It's an entirely different kind of flying.
True - though in the long run, whether the debt is repaid by grandchildren, inflation, or default, the taxpayers will suffer for it.
You might be assuming that this is an unintended consequence.
Why could it not be lassoing in the next generation of statist voters by offering them loan forgiveness (paid of course by taxpayers).
Not to mention? But you just mentioned it!
Some of the money may have gone to a good cause. Lots went to bad causes, earning the "corruption" label. (The mob does a good deed once in a while too.)
And of course, nationalizing the industry killed the goose that laid the golden egg, so in the long term, even the "good cause" was unsustainable. And in the socialist paradise, that "long term" took all of five or six years to turn to crap.
"Why should they call an elected president, for incompetent he were, a dictator."
Because he sought and accepted an "Enabling Act", letting him rule by edict. Just like his predecessor Chavez. And Hitler.
Whatever "neither" means, it's certainly different from "other".
They should've added "potato" and "potaahto".
"on Medicare and are forcing me to pay for the sickness"
You are stuck on the well-predicted slippery slope: acceptance of socialized-welfare programs leads to pressure to micromanage people's lives (to minimize cost of said social-welfare programs). The former leads inexorably to the latter. If you don't like the intrusion of the state into your body, perhaps you shouldn't support nanny medicare-like programs either.
Such money questions are improper, since they declared themselves non-profit - isn't that inoculation enough? (One wonders how one might plan to turn a profit on a one-way robot ship trip. Sponsorship stickers?)
Briefly reading TFA, these guys are analyzing people's reactions to various privacy-warning user interface options. Their baby app that heuristically monitors location-api usage is far less capable than xprivacy or its kin of android tools.
It's only false equivalence if the other guy is doing it.
The feedback cycle of leaving backward jurisdictions is just not practical for the federal case. That is a definitive difference.
As to your slur about "state/local backwardness
"There's certainly nothing magical about state and local government. Both can be just as wasteful and abusive as federal government, especially, as we've seen, when it comes to personal liberties and civil rights."
One difference is that one can vote with one's feet much easier in leaving a backward town or state, than leaving one's nation. The other is scale: the closer to the voters the representatives work/live, the more likely mutual respect.
Both factors make feedback cycles more rapid & precise. I wouldn't be surprised at all, if evidence existed that those poor backward horse-riding founders could conceive of this.
Again, you're confusing the personal preferences of various politicians, from the overall state. Misguided people elect marxists etc. to all kinds and levels of political positions even here in north america, but that does not endanger the state (until constitutional defenses are overcome).
"Trotsky were for democratically expressed communism"