3 ms·

This isn't a good metric for measuring government "productivity" at all. More information is needed like the size and scope of these particular bills, for just

This isn't a good metric for measuring government "productivity" at all. More information is needed like the size and scope of these particular bills, for just one example.

guelo 17y ago
The parent wasn't talking about productivity, I was trying to rebut his claim of California's busybody-ness compared to Texas'. 1700 bills seems pretty busy to me.
- jfornear 17y ago
  Right, but we can't compare them to each other without more information, so I don't think your rebuttal works. Given the political differences between California and Texas, there is the possible scenario that these ~1700 bills in Texas were very small, relatively pointless pieces of legislation, while California's ~700 were enormous and relatively overbearing. In case we're just debating the meaning of "busy"... Texans want their politicians to be busy doing relatively nothing, for the most part, and I think this is the general attitude expressed in the parent comment.
  - gaius 17y ago
    Exactly. Most of the Texan bills were probably along the lines of "This House believes that cattle-rustlers are no-good varmints". Whereas every Californian bill is manifesto of social engineering.
- gojomo 17y ago
  I mentioned "juice bills". These don't even have to pass; they exist just to shake the money tree of interests that want to stop them.
- mkramlich 17y ago
  Remember the talking points: If conservatives are running government and spendly recklessly on big projects "we can't afford" then government is GOOD (ex: military, tax cuts for rich, etc.). Also, laws regulating or limiting sexual activity or expression are GOOD. If liberals do it then government is BAD (health care, social security, education, etc.). Laws regulating or limiting financial, banking, large/offshore corporate, military or oil company activity or expression are BAD. -- this message brought to you by the Repub--oops, I mean--The Tea Party
  - mkramlich 17y ago
    oh the karma police, here we come. folks it's humor mixed with political insight. i was riffing on the recognition of the pattern of comparing a big Liberal state government's activity with a big Conservative state. Nobody in the thread seems to know exactly what bills the respective states passed. I was just riffing on a pattern I see in the messages that come from so-called conservatives when they argue their case. Humor + insight = good thing, just relax, it's ok really :)

This isn't a good metric for measuring government "productivity" at all. More information is needed like the size and scope of these particular bills, for just one example.

guelo 17y ago

The parent wasn't talking about productivity, I was trying to rebut his claim of California's busybody-ness compared to Texas'. 1700 bills seems pretty busy to me.

jfornear 17y ago
Right, but we can't compare them to each other without more information, so I don't think your rebuttal works. Given the political differences between California and Texas, there is the possible scenario that these ~1700 bills in Texas were very small, relatively pointless pieces of legislation, while California's ~700 were enormous and relatively overbearing. In case we're just debating the meaning of "busy"... Texans want their politicians to be busy doing relatively nothing, for the most part, and I think this is the general attitude expressed in the parent comment.
- gaius 17y ago
  Exactly. Most of the Texan bills were probably along the lines of "This House believes that cattle-rustlers are no-good varmints". Whereas every Californian bill is manifesto of social engineering.
gojomo 17y ago
I mentioned "juice bills". These don't even have to pass; they exist just to shake the money tree of interests that want to stop them.
mkramlich 17y ago
Remember the talking points: If conservatives are running government and spendly recklessly on big projects "we can't afford" then government is GOOD (ex: military, tax cuts for rich, etc.). Also, laws regulating or limiting sexual activity or expression are GOOD. If liberals do it then government is BAD (health care, social security, education, etc.). Laws regulating or limiting financial, banking, large/offshore corporate, military or oil company activity or expression are BAD. -- this message brought to you by the Repub--oops, I mean--The Tea Party
- mkramlich 17y ago
  oh the karma police, here we come. folks it's humor mixed with political insight. i was riffing on the recognition of the pattern of comparing a big Liberal state government's activity with a big Conservative state. Nobody in the thread seems to know exactly what bills the respective states passed. I was just riffing on a pattern I see in the messages that come from so-called conservatives when they argue their case. Humor + insight = good thing, just relax, it's ok really :)