2 ms·
So, you're saying it's good for the gov't to give a lot of handouts, but to ensure fairness all citizens will have to get involved, follow politics, lobby their
by tlb 17y ago
So, you're saying it's good for the gov't to give a lot of handouts, but to ensure fairness all citizens will have to get involved, follow politics, lobby their congressperson, to ensure the pork is divided fairly.
How about just making the government hand out less pork. Wouldn't that be more efficient? As pork approaches zero, it's not only fair, but founders won't waste all their time writing grant proposals and we all won't have to waste our time getting involved in politics.
- jhancock 17y agoI agree with the first part of your response although its not really a goal of this form of stimulus to hand out "fairly". The goal is to provide for macro-economic stimulus. The second part of your reply depends on many factors. Not every form of stimulus ends up being a "handout" or "pork". Most stimulus can be debated ad nauseam as to if it had the intended effects and most likely if you can measure the effects, you have to do so in longer stretches than 2/4/6 year election cycles. I completely disagree that people should not "waste" their time in politics. Government is an investment. Its foolish to not oversea and provide/demand input to what you have invested in. This is a core problem with the U.S.: people think they can just pay taxes (preferably low) maybe even be so bothered as to vote once every few years, and government and the economy will run smoothly. To put it as bluntly as possible: "Democracy belongs to those that show up". If you do not get involved you will most likely find yourself eternally dissatisfied with the results.