What Can We Agree Upon?

scidoc · November 25, 2006, 7:18pm

Red states, Blue States, Higher Taxes, Lower Taxes. The Media makes every
attempt to divide us. Perhaps we could find some common ground where we all or almost all agree.

Here’s a start:

<li>The government spends money inefficiently, billions of dollars unaccounted for, so whether you a democrat, republican or independent I would suggest that money collected by the government for the common good should be spent and monitored in the same fashion we monitor our family budgets.</li>
<li>Money should not be a barrier to obtaining a college education.</li>
</ol>

If there is sensible disagreement with the premise, it doesn’t make the list.
If there is general consensus it does.

The goal is to test the hypothesis that there is a lot that we agree upon, in spite of our political and demographic differences. It would be optional but helpful to number your idea if it is new, add political persuasion if desired D,R,
I and U for urban or R for rural and East, Midwest or West. More info is always welcome.

Please be tolerant of differing views.

weenie · November 25, 2006, 7:21pm

I have a theory that the less money the government has the better - because they spend it on dumb stuff (like wars and what not…).

Here is a true story:

I walk in a large park everyday with my dogs. The grass is like 1/4 inch long (no really - it’s the shortest grass you’ve EVER seen). I once asked the park guys why they mow so often - the mower seems to run every day, all day. He told me that it’s because it’s hard to start - so it’s better to keep it running. :eek: I’d chop that park’s budget in half.

Just a microcosm of our tax dollars hard at work.

ebeeeee · November 25, 2006, 7:23pm

scidoc, as a contractor who does business with the government I say “amen” to number 1. As a parent I say “amen” to number 2. W/R.

SBmom · November 25, 2006, 7:33pm

I agree with 1&2 and will venture a possible #3 for your consideration:

There are people out there that need help from the government. They may be catastrophically ill, they may have been wiped out by an act of God, they may be elderly and infirm, they may be the innocent kids of awful parents. Without wholesale acceptance of every ‘help’ program now going, can we at least agree that there are citizens of this country who legitimately MUST be helped, if we are to be a humane society?

mini · November 25, 2006, 7:34pm

I disagree with #1. Medicare spends health care dollars far, far more efficiently than the private sector. Overhead is roughly 3% as opposed to an average of around 28% in the private sector. We are talking an order of magnitude difference here, not marginal differences. The difference in overhead alone (forget volume pricing) could fund FREE health care for every uninsured person in the U.S. Why we maintain the fiction of the efficiency of the private market in health care is beyond me.

I have worked in both sectors. On the whole, I have found the public sector more efficient. When I worked as a book publisher, I had 12-15 different printers wining and dining me, paying huge amounts for printing reps, all offering exactly the same services, at tremendous inefficiency. Now that I work in the public sector, I can obtain the same services at a fraction of the cost. Every year I put a major printing job on the printing “bid table”. Every year for the past 8 years, the government printer, unionized, etc., has come in at least 20% lower than the next lowest private sector non-union bid.

Putting aside “wastage” due to politicians (i.e. wars based on lies, deception, and fraud), what the public sector can’t do is innovate. You wouldn’t want them to, as that is not what they are paid to do. As a result, the public sector sometimes seems stodgy. But you wouldn’t really want it any other way. Meanwhile, when there is direct head-to-head competition, government (Medicare being the best example) almost always wins.

I also disagree about the analogy with the family budget. The history of Keynesian/Rooseveltian economics proves (and rather conclusively, I think) that deficit spending can spur economic prosperity (Reagan did it the same way, just with military rather than domestic spending.) Capital spending plans undertaken on the governmental level bear virtually no resemblance to those which occur in families, and prudent government deficit spending may bear virtually no relationship to what might go on in a family context.

midmo · November 25, 2006, 7:37pm

I nominate: Unequal access to high-quality K-12 education is the root of many, if not most, of the social problems we face today. (I’m a midwesterner, but have spent a lot of my adult life in the east. Neither party pleases me regularly, so I guess I’m an I.)

scidoc · November 25, 2006, 8:43pm

The purpose is to find areas of agreement not disagreement. So an argument might be in certain areas the government has demonstrated a high degree of efficiency, such as in Medicare Part B. This is just a suggestion not my premise.

Clearly in Medicare part C (the drug plan) the government has agreed with big
pharma not to use its buying power to negotiate lowest prices for pharmaceuticals as the VA does.

So, while the government cannot do everything well, please be precise in what it does well. This is not a criticism.

For humor; As far as deficit spending, if you look at my neighbors Mercedes and the fact that he is maxed out on all his credit cards, this suggests that his family believes in deficit spending. Some may feel that this drives the economy. The Japanese on the other hand take a different approach to saving.

kluge · November 25, 2006, 9:07pm

I think point 1 is basically wrong, as a relative statement. Popular, but wrong. I think that there are areas where the public sector is more efficient than the private sector, and vice versa. Whether there’s a general truth one way or the other is realistically unknowable, given the variables. I also think that there is waste and inefficiency in every budget - household budgets included. Anecdotes of individual bad fiscal decisions - among the millions made each year by governmental agencies at all levels - do not prove the case. I suspect many government agencies and entities do a better job than lots of households. Oversimplifying the issue doesn’t actually lead to progress in this case.

A worthwhile exercise in mulling a question such as this is to ask yourself who would profit by having more people believe one thing or the other, and consider what resources the have to influence your opinion and what they may have done to do so. “Government is inefficient” is a “truism” the belief in which benefits some members of society disproportionately, and which gets a disproportionate amount of publicity. Ever wonder why?.

Suburban west coast D.

mini · November 25, 2006, 9:30pm

“The Japanese on the other hand take a different approach to saving.”

And have been mired in recession/depression for almost two decades.

“So, while the government cannot do everything well, please be precise in what it does well.”

Delivery of health care through physicians. Competitive pricing or better and efficiency of services in virtually every area in which it is allowed to compete.
(Public colleges and universities are a great example.)

rty456 · November 25, 2006, 11:09pm

Well I would suggest that one thing we can agree on --except for a few elected politicans and there handlers --is that we are all mostly interested in solving our daily problems and not the washington (and state capitol ) one upmanship.

this little thread shows that many of us have fundamental differences in the role of government, education etc. I have seen enough of mini to know he is an eloquent proponent of his views. I imagine the tax money supporting public education shoudl be added to the ‘effciency’ tab … and I would even question whether ‘efficiency’ is always the goal. I would add that an educated populous is valuable —even for selfish reasons to everyone. As a middle aged white suburbanite I believe having one million hungry disenfranchised indiviuals 35 miles away downtown is not good for the security and livelhood of my family, never mind the moral issues!

a few ramblings

scansmom · November 25, 2006, 11:50pm

I would agree with #1 in part: government does seem to spend much of its money inefficiently. But, unfortunately that is the same manner that MANY families manage their budgets. (Budget? What budget? Too many Americans live on credit well beyond their means, live from pay check to pay check, and pay off only the most immediate bills each month…)

I realize that the lives of many CC’ers are far removed from the lives of the poor and working classes but even among most of us, I expect that there would still be little consensus on how we even define efficiency, common good or budget.

So maybe scrap #1. But I agree with #2.

scidoc · November 26, 2006, 7:27pm

What Can We Agree Upon?

<ol>
<li>The government spends money inefficiently, billions of dollars unaccounted for, so whether you a democrat, republican or independent I would suggest that money collected by the government for the common good should be spent and monitored in the same fashion we monitor our family budgets.</li>
</ol>

weenie:I once asked the park guys why they mow so often - the mower seems to run every day, all day. He told me that it’s because it’s hard to start - so it’s better to keep it running. I’d chop that park’s budget in half.

ebeeeee-as a contractor who does business with the government I say “amen” to number 1

SBmom-I agree with 1

mini-government is efficient-Delivery of health care through physicians. Competitive pricing or better and efficiency of services in virtually every area in which it is allowed to compete.
(Public colleges and universities are a great example.)

scansmom-I would agree with #1 in part: government does seem to spend much of its money inefficiently. But, unfortunately that is the same manner that MANY families manage their budgets. (Budget? What budget? Too many Americans live on credit well beyond their means, live from pay check to pay check, and pay off only the most immediate bills each month…)

GOOD POINT; WAS ONLY REFERRING TO CCERS, SHOULD BE MONITORED JUDICIOUSLY SO THAT EVERY DOLLAR CAQN BE ADEQUATELY ACCOUNTED FOR, WITHIN REASON.

<ol>
<li>Money should not be a barrier to obtaining a college education.</li>
</ol>

ebeeeee-W/R.
SBmom-I agree with 1&2

<ol>
<li>SBmom-There are people out there that need help from the government. They may be catastrophically ill, they may have been wiped out by an act of God, they may be elderly and infirm, they may be the innocent kids of awful parents. Without wholesale acceptance of every ‘help’ program now going, can we at least agree that there are citizens of this country who legitimately MUST be helped, if we are to be a humane society?</li>
<li>midmo-equal access to high-quality K-12 education</li>
<li>rty456-we are all mostly interested in solving our daily problems and not the washington (and state capitol ) one upmanship.</li>
<li>scansmom-even among most of us, I expect that there would still be little consensus on how we even define efficiency, common good or budget</li>
</ol>

SUMMARYAND DIRECTION:
THE GOVERNMENT IS MORE EFFICIENT IN SOME AREAS THAN OTHERS AND GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION IS MORE ESSENTIAL IN SOME AREAS THAN OTHERS.

<ol>
<li>Money should not be a barrier to obtaining a college education.
NOT MUCH OBJECTION SO FAR.</li>
<li>NOT MUCH COMMENT SO FAR. PLEASE FORGIVE MY LAPSES IN TRYING TO MODERATE AREAS OF AGREEMENT. WHAT IS THE RECOMMENDATION?
HIGHER MIN WAGE? MORE WELFARE? PLEASE TRY TO BE MORE SPECIFIC.</li>
<li>HARD TO DISAGREE WITH MIDMO. </li>
<li>THIS IS THE CONUNDRUM OF ALL AMERICANS; SHOULD WE BE ISOLATIONIST OR TRY TO SOLVE SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORS PROBLEMS?</li>
<li>scansmom-even among most of us, I expect that there would still be little consensus on how we even define efficiency, common good ETC.</li>
</ol>

THAT’S WHAT WE ARE DRIVING AT CONSENSUS; THEN WE WILL NOMINATE
OUR CC CANDIDATE IN '08.

momof2inca · November 26, 2006, 11:56pm

<ol>
<li>Americans deserve equal access to quality health care and necessary treatment regardless of their age, ability to pay or status.</li>
</ol>

emeraldkity4 · November 27, 2006, 12:13am

Americans deserve equal access to quality health care and necessary treatment regardless of their age, ability to pay or status.

as long as it isnt heroic measures health care & as long it it includes effective contraception

Hanna · November 27, 2006, 12:01pm

AMEN! This is the part that I know won’t get universal agreement, but it will bring together many people across the red/blue divide:

Every young person in the country should have ready access to safe, effective birth control and the information necessary to use it responsibly.

scidoc · November 27, 2006, 4:11pm

What Can We Agree Upon?

<ol>
<li>The government spends money inefficiently, billions of dollars unaccounted for, so whether you a democrat, republican or independent I would suggest that money collected by the government for the common good should be spent and monitored in the same fashion we monitor our family budgets.</li>
</ol>

weenie:I once asked the park guys why they mow so often - the mower seems to run every day, all day. He told me that it’s because it’s hard to start - so it’s better to keep it running. I’d chop that park’s budget in half.

ebeeeee-as a contractor who does business with the government I say “amen” to number 1

SBmom-I agree with 1

mini-government is efficient-Delivery of health care through physicians. Competitive pricing or better and efficiency of services in virtually every area in which it is allowed to compete.
(Public colleges and universities are a great example.)

scansmom-I would agree with #1 in part: government does seem to spend much of its money inefficiently. But, unfortunately that is the same manner that MANY families manage their budgets. (Budget? What budget? Too many Americans live on credit well beyond their means, live from pay check to pay check, and pay off only the most immediate bills each month…)

GOOD POINT; WAS ONLY REFERRING TO CCERS, SHOULD BE MONITORED JUDICIOUSLY SO THAT EVERY DOLLAR CAQN BE ADEQUATELY ACCOUNTED FOR, WITHIN REASON.

<ol>
<li>Money should not be a barrier to obtaining a college education.</li>
</ol>

ebeeeee-W/R.
SBmom-I agree with 1&2

<ol>
<li>SBmom-There are people out there that need help from the government. They may be catastrophically ill, they may have been wiped out by an act of God, they may be elderly and infirm, they may be the innocent kids of awful parents. Without wholesale acceptance of every ‘help’ program now going, can we at least agree that there are citizens of this country who legitimately MUST be helped, if we are to be a humane society?</li>
<li>midmo-equal access to high-quality K-12 education</li>
<li>rty456-we are all mostly interested in solving our daily problems and not the washington (and state capitol ) one upmanship.</li>
<li>scansmom-even among most of us, I expect that there would still be little consensus on how we even define efficiency, common good or budget</li>
</ol>

SUMMARYAND DIRECTION:
THE GOVERNMENT IS MORE EFFICIENT IN SOME AREAS THAN OTHERS AND GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION IS MORE ESSENTIAL IN SOME AREAS THAN OTHERS.

<ol>
<li>Money should not be a barrier to obtaining a college education.
NOT MUCH OBJECTION SO FAR.</li>
<li>NOT MUCH COMMENT SO FAR. PLEASE FORGIVE MY LAPSES IN TRYING TO MODERATE AREAS OF AGREEMENT. WHAT IS THE RECOMMENDATION?
HIGHER MIN WAGE? MORE WELFARE? PLEASE TRY TO BE MORE SPECIFIC.</li>
<li>HARD TO DISAGREE WITH MIDMO.</li>
<li>THIS IS THE CONUNDRUM OF ALL AMERICANS; SHOULD WE BE ISOLATIONIST OR TRY TO SOLVE SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORS PROBLEMS?</li>
<li>scansmom-even among most of us, I expect that there would still be little consensus on how we even define efficiency, common good ETC.</li>
<li>momof2inca-Americans deserve equal access to quality health care and necessary treatment regardless of their age, ability to pay or status.</li>
</ol>

emeraldkity4-as long as it isnt heroic measures health care & as long it it includes effective contraception

What Can We Agree Upon?

CONNECT WITH US