Ron Paul: Dept. of Transportation Only Needs 'One Guy and a Computer'
Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul doesn't want to abolish the Department of Transportation, but he said on Tuesday that the agency really only needed "one guy and a computer."
During a town hall event in Spartanburg, South Carolina, the Texas congressman made the case for "user fees" for national parks and the federal highway system.
"Ideally, you can come up with all sorts of schemes about private highways and all, but that's not going to happen," Paul explained. "But we do have a user fee with our gasoline tax. Trouble is, they take that money then they spend it on something else."
"If you had a user fee for our highway, what you could do is have one person in the office. Oh, we got umpteen billions of dollars in gasoline tax and all they have to do is divide up the people in each state or, you know, the size of the state and send the money back."
He added: "And you could do that with one guy and a computer. But instead, we have a Department of Transportation, probably has tens of thousands of people, you know, playing politics with it all."
Paul has said that he wants to abolish at least five federal agencies, a list that does not include the Department of Transportation.
What is the end game for millions of unemployed Americans for these black hearted bastards? These freaks truly feel good contributing to the jobless rates...until they're in the unemployment office.
Ron Paul is a crazy old racist heartless asshole unfit to be POTUS.
And again, fuck you to you selfish, ignorant Paul ass munchers.
...until they're in the unemployment office.
They're NEVER in the unemployment office. Everyone else loses their jobs, but because these nasty, sly fuckers know how to play on the worst and basest of human emotions, they'll ALWAYS have a job. Riling up the masses and turning poor against poor is an eternally lucrative business. That's how they can get to be raisiny old men and still never learn the slightest thing about what it means to be an ordinary person. They'll go to hell convinced that they deserve their riches and the rest of us are just moronic sheep.
There's always free cheddar in the mousetrap, baby. - Tom Waits
i love this answer,but these little simple sounding solutions appeal to the simple minded people only.and they do vote.and we know where they are all at.and its sad that ron paul would stoop this low.i have lost a lot of respect for him.i thought he was above these type of carl rove tactics.obviously
when you seem to be last in any race,you will do almost anything,and i think rons ship has sailed.
and lets hope his son who is turtle faced mitchs little companion in kentucky will sink soon too.
he is as bad as his dad.
Bottom line this guy is a nut job , a libertarian freak . Why don't these misfits pool their $ and buy themselves and Island , leave , they are not fit for society .
"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all."
These fuckers never offer an alternative solution for the massive joblessness that their "visions" will obviously create.
As Matt Stoller, a former aide to Alan Grayson stated: “the anger [Paul] inspires comes not from his positions, but from the tensions that modern American liberals bear within their own worldview.” Ron Paul’s candidacy is a mirror held up in front of the face of America’s Democratic Party and its progressive wing, and the image that is reflected is an ugly one. You don't want to see that image because you think you are good looking instesad of ugly.
"That's fu*#ing retarded."
Big City Mayor
it must be fact.
me-oww!
Actually, LeftandLeft, the more they save you on taxes is more that you can put into your own growing business. The more your business grows the more jobs you can provide.
I'm sure you have a lot of employees already but wouldn't you like to help the economy and world by having even more?
By firing people, the free market will magically create jobs. Despite corporate hoarding of money and the refusal of businesses to "grow" (primarily due to lack of demand), giving them more money to hoard and lowering demand will magically cause them to grow.
It's not really L&L's fault that he doesn't understand this magic. It's so magical that it's results are hidden in the history of deregulation, privatization and lowering taxes on the wealthy. Without the also magical abilities to see these magical effects, muggles are left with a history that shows (in the non-magical realm anyway) that these policies are very good at further concentrating wealth at the very top, but rather poor at helping anyone else.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Corporations can't exist in a free market.
Figures.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
does that mean?
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Corporations are a piece of legislation. Pieces of legislation don't exist in free markets/environments.
Murder becomes legal because pieces of legislation don't exist? Or does just some legislation not exist?
Hasa Diga Eebowai
...I like magic.
Mickey: "It was an epiphany. Do you know what an epipany is?"
Keoni: "NOT NOW MICKEY!"
...of Chicago and I have other lawyer friends who make up to five times as much as I do because I truly represent the poor and sometimes barely get paid. I know this unemployment crisis contributes to the depressing Illinois criminal justice system I work in daily.
You're an asshole.
I knew you were a lawyer ;)
Corruption favors the wealthy.
....republicans seem to hate workers and try to justify it with the typical bad apples bullshit. Paul is no different.
Btw, my brothers make me the family pinata on holiday get togethers :)
Let me take a wild guess: three poorly told lawyer jokes followed by a plea for free legal advice?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
...plead guilty to any offense if he discovered that I was his rep.
And that is the kindest thing I hear :)
for the MIC the more return you would get from them. We are being screwed, not by taxes, but where they are earmarked.
of being delusional. Reality need not play any part. If something comes along that proves them wrong, they can just wave it away - just like the "progressives" that are defending his bugfuckery right here on this page.
There's always free cheddar in the mousetrap, baby. - Tom Waits
"And you could do that with one guy and a computer. But instead, we have a Department of Transportation, probably has tens of thousands of people, you know, playing politics with it all."
This is what you need to know about Ron Paul: His views on government service are merely those of the GOP turned up to eleven. The reason why he wants to reduce the Department of Transportation to "one guy with a computer" stems from the GOP view toward government employees. Everyone who draws a paycheck from the federal government* is a parasite sucking up money that should rightfully be going to contractors. These contractors, of course, can do the same job with all the cost effectiveness and efficiency that we've come to expect from companies like Haliburton, Blackwater, and KBR.
*Elected republican officials excepted, of course.
Weird, isn't it? As Vorobyaninoff said, "You'll have to puzzle it out for yourself. It's too much for me."
There's always free cheddar in the mousetrap, baby. - Tom Waits
High school kids. The whole department could be replaced with one 15 year old. :Yeah, that would do it.
Norquist on steroids... bathtub and all.
In the marketplace of ideas, too many people shop in the bargain basement.
-- Thunder BlueRose
Why, yes, I am a card-carrying member of the ACLU
http://saxman.bravepages.com
by one guy with a computer?
Or was it one guy with a Smith-Carona? Underwood?
"That's fu*#ing retarded."
Big City Mayor
.
What if they were all banged out on a brother?
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
an Adam?
.
.
Why do allegedly intelligent progressives even give this nutcase the time of day? I seriously question the mental capacity of anyone who does, especially if they continue to do so no matter how many times Paul makes his stupidity obvious (particularly when it's this blatantly obvious).
"Whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, the Republicans are not the least bit interested in solving it. They are interested in two things, and two things only: making you afraid of it, and telling you who's to blame for it."
. . . among some progressives because not only have Obama and his loyalists completely abdicated on issues from Endless War, imprisonment and execution without due process, and warrantless spying, to the War on Drugs, Wall Street and torturer immunity, and whistleblower prosecutions, but also because they have actively sided with the far Right on these issues by minimizing their importance, making excuses for why it just has to be that way, and even actively defending them.
It's not like this nut case is most progressives' first, second, or even hundredth choice, but with total Democratic abdication on this issues, Ron Paul has become the only game in town.
Don't like Ron Paul's newfound appeal on these progressive issues? Fine. There's plenty about Ron Paul not to like. But don't blame the progressives who consider these issues important. Blame the Democratic loyalists who've left Ron Paul as the highest profile voice left speaking out on them.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Hear, hear. Excellent post.
I would only add that real progressives would never, *ever* vote for drronpaul, despite having some points of agreement. We have perfectly good alternatives that do NOT include teh krazee The Greens will have a candidate that will be deserving of our votes, and the support will not only increase their presence on the national stage, but also inform the DNC/Wrong Way drones that have infiltrated our party that we *do* have an alternative to their blue doggery and they need to get the f*ck out.
I do wonder who drronpaul proposes to program the lone employee's computer?
....when he (under paul, it probably wouldn't be a woman) has to leave the office to supervise or train or inspect, does he take the computer with him? Will they spend...no they won't spend money either, on an iPad, so that's out. If its not a laptop, I hope its not one of those supercomputers; that would be murder to haul around.
Mickey: "It was an epiphany. Do you know what an epipany is?"
Keoni: "NOT NOW MICKEY!"
Paul wouldn't even be on the radar if democrats were actually Democrats.
about what government does and the the resources required to do it. Yep, definitely crazy. But how come the FDA or the EPA or any other department of the government of the US government issues a ruling or policy at odds with the perceived wisdom of the left then that organization must have been "captured" or in some other way corrupt? Anybody on the left trust the DOJ? Or any other department of the government? Oddly enough the same people seem to believe that the people who actually work in these departments are noble individuals well deserving of raises and pensions and benefits. Very curious.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Your oversimplified view surprises me...not.
The problems the progressives have with government agencies are easily remedied by having publicly funded elections. It's not the structure that is the problem, it's the management. Just because we observe and detest cronyinsm doesn't mean we need to take down the entire system.
"Someday somebody related to some of these sufferers, these victims, these collaterally damaged souls, may try to kill you. And I have to tell you, I think you’ll have it coming." - Christopher Cooper
I don't believe I'm the one exhibiting full blown bi-polarity and while you seem to be a very rational person who does not believe the entire system needs to be "taken down" your views on this are not shared by quite a few fellow posters.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Problem: The bus driver appears to be inebriated, and is driving the bus erratically.
Normal Solution: Replace the driver.
Libertarian Solution: Fire the driver. Dismantle the bus. Sell off the parts. Ride the free market to work.
lol
Corruption favors the wealthy.
One guy and a computer to manage and maintain the 45000 miles of interstste highways? Enough already of coddling this asshole. Why is this fucking imbecile with his comical, asinine ideas given a national platform? In a sane time a buffoon and idiot like Ron Paul with his libertarian fantasies about no government needed wouldn't be given the time of day by the press.
It would be nice to see his moronic ideas called out for their blatant stupidity by someone, anyone, in the world of politics or media.
I'm pretty sure he was talking about one guy managing the money.
Then why didn't he SAY that? It's not as if that's any more complicated. In fact, his base would LOVE to hear that.
No, he's just a fucking loony, and it's bizarre how he's getting people on the left to swallow his bullshit just be waving an "anti-war" flag. (I for one do not believe his supposedly anti-war stance for a second.)
There's always free cheddar in the mousetrap, baby. - Tom Waits
You ask: "Why is this fucking imbecile with his comical, asinine ideas given a national platform?"
But that question could be asked about any of the Republican candidates...and a fair number of Democrats.
A more pertinent question might be: Why are progressives singling out Paul as an imbecile when all of the Republican candidates are imbeciles?
And the answer is: He is the only one who is highlighting the Democrats' corporatist war mongering and assault on civil liberties. Of course, this doesn't change the fact that he's an imbecile. But it does shine a light on the embarrassment felt by Obama's defenders that only this imbecile is defending what were once Democratic ideals.
Why are progressives singling out Paul as an imbecile when all of the Republican candidates are imbeciles?
Because the rest of them aren't being taken seriously by PEOPLE WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER. Christ, can't you smell a rat? It's so freaking OBVIOUS. He's actually running around SAYING this shit, and you're making excuses for him!
There's always free cheddar in the mousetrap, baby. - Tom Waits
"There may be a number of people who cannot be prosecuted for past crimes, in come cases because evidence may be tainted, but who nonetheless pose a threat to the security of the United States." --President Obama, 2009
He's actually running around SAYING this shit, and you're making excuses for him!
What is it with people who think that any criticism of Ron Paul is an automatic defense of the President?
Ron Paul is a crazy old coot. And regardless of whatever else I think of the other people in the race on all sides, he will remain a crazy old coot. The fact that he's getting more media attention because the rest of the Republican field makes him look sane and reasonable does not suddenly make him sane and reasonable.
think any defense of Paul's position on civil liberties is a wholesale advocacy of his candidacy?
I think you must be talking to someone else, because I didn't say or imply that. If you are drawing that inference, I hope you're doing so in pencil.
Kindly do not put words into my mouth.
and I agree with him. But my agreement stops there. It's not so much the issues themselves but the overall political agenda behind them. I have regular discussions with a prominent libertarian teabagger and we agree about many of the ills afflicting this country, but have radically differing opinions as to the origins of these problems, and therefore the solutions.
"Someday somebody related to some of these sufferers, these victims, these collaterally damaged souls, may try to kill you. And I have to tell you, I think you’ll have it coming." - Christopher Cooper
. . . because on issues like the War on Terror, the War on Drugs, imprisonment and execution without charge or trial, mass deportations, immunity for torture, Wall Street immunity, etc., the rest of the Republican field agrees with Barack Obama.
Ron Paul, nut case that he is, reminds Obama loyalists just how far they have fallen.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
.
and Paul. Paul wants to eliminate foreign wars and bring race/class/civil war back to the US. Where it rightfully belongs.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
How blind can you be?
Obama refuses to use the words "War on terror", repeating over and over again that this is not a war situation.
He forced Congress to alter the language of NDAA to delete indefinite detention for American citizens, and issued a signing statement that he thought it unconstitutional and would not enforce the provision for it with respect to others.
What Wall Street "immunity"? Wall Street and global financiers literally have most governments world wide by the throat, but there has actually been progress in the DOJ toward bringing some to justice, and what the DOJ has been unable to pursue, States Attorneys General and filling the gap with assistance from the DOJ.
So Baloney.
MyMy
Throw people in prison, keep people in prison, hell, even have them killed without charge or trial? Warrantless spying? Drone attacks? The surge in Afghanistan? His justification is
"The War on Terror""Kittens With Bows."Obama signed the NDAA with it's "imprisonment without due process" provisions to his shame, and history will not forgive that no matter how much he claims it was justified by Kittens with Bows (you're right, that does sound better)..
And where is this "progress" by the DOJ? It's been three years, and the crimes occurred before that. The general Statute of Limitations on Federal crimes is five years (18 USC 3282). That "progress" appears to be immunity - more and more of it every day.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
is that he hasn't exercised these imaginary powers! He hasn't perped walked everyone you think should be in jail. He hasn't used his imaginary constitutional powers to force through legislation congress will not pass. The list is practically endless.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Not mine. I believe in investigation, charge, and proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Pretty basic stuff, really
Corruption favors the wealthy.
And if the DOJ determines they haven't got the necessary evidence to charge all the bankers with fraud you will be satisfied with that?
Hasa Diga Eebowai
is not on Perry's list, or Paul's. The DOJ is Obama's (and Holder's). So I think we can extrapolate that what you ask is indeed highly likely.
"Someday somebody related to some of these sufferers, these victims, these collaterally damaged souls, may try to kill you. And I have to tell you, I think you’ll have it coming." - Christopher Cooper
It's not like you needed to hear it, Peter. Due process is the objective, and your strawman that people want the bankers railroaded or "perp walked" is your invented argument.
But you know that.
Just as you know that DOJ hasn't been convening grand juries, issuing subpoenas, and actually investigating, so that when you throw out the hypothetical that "DOJ determines they haven't got the necessary evidence" you're well aware that it won't be following an investigation. Quite the opposite.
DOJ has been trying to get the states to settle their claims - again without investigation - and it's been three years. And the Statute of Limitations keep on ticking.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
What do you think Letters of Marque and Reprisal are, and why has Ron Paul offered legislation three times to issue them?
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
Um, a power of Congress and not the President.
U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8
Corruption favors the wealthy.
...a charge or a trial before a Letter of Marque and Reprisal is issued?
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
Libertarianism is a foolish ideology. I think that's being highlighted. Of course, pure socialism, communism, or capitalism are also truly foolish ideologies. Our problem in this country is this obsession with ideological purity. Every one of these philosophies is effective at solving specific problems, but none of them are good at solving all of our problems, on a broad level.
Communism is great for farming cooperatives, allowing them to pool resources and risk, and leverage themselves in the market.
Socialism is great for public / municipal services, such as roads, safety, health, and welfare, where "competition" isn't practical (one wire to your house / can't have 3 roads running parallel / need independent bodies).
Capitalism is a great way of distributing non-essential resources and services in a rapidly evolving environment. Its evolutionary nature is well suited to nonstandard problems.
Libertarianism is the nihilism of political ideologies. I mean, decentralization of power is a good idea. De-legislation of the individual is a good idea. But, social services are not the iron shackles that bind us. I'm not being held back by welfare or municipal fire and police services. The federal highway system isn't a problem for me.
Probably because I have more than a third grade understanding of economics. Essential services get paid for, one way or another. There is a markup, no matter what. If I get my money back in taxes, I'll pay it back out in fees and inflation. It's an artificial choice.
And, this kind of foolish, reductionist thinking (the department of transportation's only function is the redistribution of funds to state legislative assemblies) is a prime example of that simplistic thinking.
...!
Mickey: "It was an epiphany. Do you know what an epipany is?"
Keoni: "NOT NOW MICKEY!"
.
other than Paul who has uttered the initials "MIC"?
Well, I think Ike did... but, what... 60-odd years ago?
In the marketplace of ideas, too many people shop in the bargain basement.
-- Thunder BlueRose
Why, yes, I am a card-carrying member of the ACLU
http://saxman.bravepages.com
If he would like to give us the names of major highways in his area we can divert most tractor trailer, buses, and hazmat vehicle, traffic thru his roads and than the 1 guy with a computer can do all the DOT inspections on all these vehicles in his hometown. Mind you, it will take a while for this 1 guy to inspect all 2 million or so of these vehicles so there may be some traffic delays so when you go to work it may take a few more hours to get there but just think of the savings to the rest of us taxpayers.
I think some of you are missing the bigger picture. Paul is trying to save "taxpayers" money. Taxpayers = people. People who pay less taxes have more money to spend on making their lives better. In order to make their life better people have to buy things. When people buy things they cause a shortage of whatever they're buying. To fill the shortage, people have to produce more. People produce while on the job. Demand for more production = more jobs. Those jobs can be filled from the ranks of the unemployed, even if those unemployed were formerly "state" employees. The beauty of the production coming from the private sector is that it is only bought by those who actually want it. Many of the products offered by the public sector are shabby and over priced due to the producer's monopoly. Therefore, there are many people who are forced to buy unwanted public sector products.
It's about efficiency, people. Do you have a problem with efficiency?
Here's the problem with that - when you start injecting a profit motive into public safety functions, you end up with situations like in the old days where "fire insurance" meant you bought a policy from a privatized fire service to protect your house from fire. If you didn't have a policy, then your house burnt to the ground.
Now imagine a privatized air traffic control system to govern the hundreds of thousands of aircraft that cross through our airspace. Or a privatized safety board (or no safety board at all) to investigate when airplanes crash. That does not strike me as efficient. It strikes me as making air travel about as safe as playing leapfrog with unicorns.
Airlines cannot afford unsafe flying. Leave them alone and they'll take care of it.
Private businesses compete. Competition brings excellence.
Well in any given industry some one is top dog aren't they? But then someone is on the bottom too and since there is only one measure of excellence by Paul's standard, and that is return on investment, where do you suppose the industry bottom dwellers trim costs? Especially when no one is looking.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
If the so-called bottom dwellers can't compete they will have to move on. Because customers are always looking for the best value, cheaters don't last long in a competitive market.
these discoveries are made on who is and is not cheating? That is the main problem with Libertarians isn't it? Life has zero value.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
that spurred new regulations, the latest being sleep time for cabin crew based on the 2009 crash, where the airlines were 'taking care of it.'
Idiot.
me-oww!
How many "government" hoops would a safer, more efficient airline have to jump through to even go into business. Regulation creates monopolies. Monopolies don't have to concern themselves with competition. Monopolies don't have to be the best that they can be. Therfore, they don't have provide the best product possible
in the 60s. And carriers with names like Pan Am, Eastern, TWA, NW Orient. You're full of shit and non logical conclusions. You are a member of Time Wasters, Inc. In fact, I daresay you have a monopoly on that.
And safety regs are 'govt hoops?' You ARE really a stupid person.
me-oww!
Hey moral,
Go to your local unemployment office...the crowds there will make you feel better about yourself.
So when a plane crashes, the family can be consoled by the fact that the airline's bottom line will take a hit? That's your argument?
Also, you neglected to discuss the subject of air traffic control, which is something that large aircraft cannot function safely without. We've seen plenty of close calls in clear weather even with ATC. Now imagine trying to land at LaGuardia or JFK in cloudy weather without someone at TRACON or the tower telling you where everyone else is around you. Unless you expect every plane to have a person whose only job is to constantly report position, altitude and airspeed from the time they leave the ground until they arrive at their destination.
Wrong. The flying public cannot afford unsafe flying. The airlines could afford to let the unsafe planes crash and burn; good ones would have their insurance buddies compensate them for the old, outdated, and now wrecked equipment.
The passengers? They should've known better, right?
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
Insurance companies don't have unlimited funds.
...your loved ones are killed in a preventable accident, you're OK with that?
Mickey: "It was an epiphany. Do you know what an epipany is?"
Keoni: "NOT NOW MICKEY!"
By eliminating regulatory oversight on a huge array of issues this will save the "taxpayers" money? How'd that work out in the financial sector? In other hot news it has been determined that taxpayers can save huge amount of money if only firefighters were eliminated.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Not only would it save on salaries and benefits, for Seattle, the savings in cop-generated lawsuits and the insurance for it would be astonishing.
me-oww!
Customers do an excellent job of regulating as long as they know that no one else is supposed to be doing the regulating for them. Caveat emptor should never be extinguished.
.
doesn't it?
me-oww!
.
.
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
but still....
me-oww!
Have you ever noticed that the individual that has no legitimate argument will always resort to name calling.
libertarians always put periods at the ends of questions?
most the crap they throw at the wall does not stick?
me-oww!
It's not for lack of trying.
Millions were told they could afford mortgages so they got them. Unfortunately they couldn't afford them.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
If they'd done so, they'd have known Ford skimped to make a few extra bucks and sold them what could become a flaming death trap if they were rear-ended.
Why couldn't those excellent regulating customers each get themselves an engineering degree or two, take the car apart, and thoroughly examine each part to find Ford's defect? Why couldn't they each have bought a dozen Pintos to crash test on their own course before investing in the one they wanted to drive?
It was obviously because they knew some one else was supposed to do the regulating for them.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Are you trying to tell me that Ford built an unsafe car while "government" was supposed to keep people safe?
I used a well known case that was a significant impetus for improved saftey regulation of the auto industry to point out that your claim that "customers do an excellent job of regulating" is not only completely unworkable in a modern society, but also is quite beyond idiotic.
But you understood clearly that from my comment. It's not like I was trying to hide it.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
which found it would be cheaper to pay burn victims' claims than install a 50 cent piece that would prevent the gas tank from breaking open, or at least lessen the nearly 100% cn. Those victims often suffered burns all over their bodies, because they were trapped in the tiny back seat of a 2 door car, right by the tank. Many died.
That's a company regulating itself, stupid. The Govt actually gave them hell for that. Look into to it.
me-oww!
when their bodies litter the runway...
me-oww!
Or, you could put together a table and do supply/demand curves, but not be a private organization... no, it has to be private to do supply/demand. Nobody else can understand the chart.
I hate to trot out a tired quote, but: "What do you think the Russians talk about in their councils of state, Karl Marx? They get out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, minimax solutions, and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments, just like we do." (Network 1976)
It's done how it's done. The same people do it either way. The difference is that government services are guaranteed by law and run with the motive of fulfilling their mandate with the lowest cost, as opposed to maximizing the cost within market forces. Government services are modeled as employees, working for the american people, as opposed to companies, profiting from the american people.
Not to say employees can't be a pain, but at least they're loyal.
"People who pay less taxes have more money to spend on making their lives better. In order to make their life better people have to buy things from China. When people buy things from China they cause a shortage in China of whatever they're buying. To fill the shortage, people in China have to produce more. People in China produce while on the job. Demand for more production in China = more jobs in China. Those jobs in China can be filled from the ranks of the unemployed in China, even if those unemployed in China were formerly "state" employees. The beauty of the production coming from the private sector in China is that it is only bought by those who actually want it. "
Written on my laptop (made in China) while sitting on my chair (made in China) at my desk (made in China). And I TRY to buy American. It's nearly impossible. Give it a shot.
it's you, not seeing the big picture. And you are sounding very Teutonic with your efficiency shit.
me-oww!
...which isn't perfect but better than what the private sector offers?
Mickey: "It was an epiphany. Do you know what an epipany is?"
Keoni: "NOT NOW MICKEY!"
...unless mittens is giving me some of that, I won't ever see any more money to buy things to create the demand in china that keeps people employed over there.
Mickey: "It was an epiphany. Do you know what an epipany is?"
Keoni: "NOT NOW MICKEY!"
Like most of his "plans" they are designed to sound very simple and reasonable to his target demo. The fact that the DOT does a million things besides roads is beside the point. I really want each state to come up with safety standards for tires, headlights, fuel systems, etc, etc, etc. I also want different types of signs in each state to make cross country travel more exciting. Will this one guy be covering the rail, maritime and air functions as well?
It's so much more reasonable to have 50 state DOT's doing duplicate work for everything the federal agency does now. So much more cost effective as well.
A huckster spouting off for the rubes.
What's the problem, here? It's not like roads go across state boundaries.
What's the problem, here? Ron Paul. Solution? Abolish Ron Paul.
that some progressives think would be "good for the country". Yeah, he'll really help with our problems.
There's always free cheddar in the mousetrap, baby. - Tom Waits
at sometime in his life, long enough, it seems, to become an expert in how the system works!!!! What a fucking genius!!!
me-oww!
I'm certain that he and his acolytes have not the slightest idea what most civil servants actually do. Just as he is equally certain that it is something that doesn't need to be done.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
out comes bullshit like this.
I worked at DOT for four years, and believe me, the entire national highway system, planes, trains, buses and any other form of transportation would crash and burn without the DOT, if its cut down to one guy and a computer.
F. A. A. A significant part of DOT.
Rules, regs, enforcement, etc. etc.
Moron.
all it takes is a guy with a catcher's mitt. Who needs to have licensed physicians. That costs customers way more.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
.
almost with some expertise. The fact that he's not a woman DOES get in the way of 100% understanding, though.
me-oww!
"Every other job in the world is easy except for my own, which is the hardest job in the world!"
Paul is good at masking his real agenda: the delivery of all public goods into private sector hands, where all of us will be at the mercy of these 'private' entities with no recourse to the courts or avenues of appeal to the government when they inevitably gouge and skewer us and give us, a la PG&E in California, unworthy unsafe products in order to offer bonuses to their CEOs.
In other words, he'd like us ALL to live like the people in poorest back woods hill country places in Kentucky, or the dirt poor border towns in Texas.
Except him. He flies first class, remember.
MyMy
I have a sister that lives very close to Mr. Paul in East Bayou Fell-off-the-planet Texas and you can bet this proposal is based on the roads in that district... If you like 1830's livin and horse-drawn carriages and un-pasteurized milk in dirty quart bottles, go for it. But in 2012 Rep. Paul, you've out lived your novelty. Just disappear...
How would you like to be someone working a thankless job and have your POTUS say the following?
Kind of shows his ignorance and his lack of people skills at the same time. This guys is as bad as Bush in the "I read the pamphlet, now let me make the decisions" camp.
If he were taller and able to frighten a horse, he'd probably swagger, too.
Ron Paul should not hold office ANYWHERE. Also, how can these rethugs talk big about jobs and job creation...yet want to fire everyone? HUH?!?
NOBODY 2012
Hey Ron, you mean only one white guy.
The Federal Tax is to pay for New and Repair old Federal Highways and Does Not Belong to States nor does the money need to be in State Transportation Coffers to do with as they wish. The money is NOT for STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEMS.
Federal Highway and Transportation should only have Federal Agents Responsible for the use of those Funds and placed where they are needed most.
Donaldd
Comments are closed on this entry