Comments on news posted 2009-06-11 14:17:28: The General Accounting Office (GAO) this week released a new report (pdf) suggesting that whatever broadband policy the government adopts -- it needs to have clear performance goals. ..
Such Republican political talking points. Keep in mind that Corporate = profit -> worse than waste because they take as much extras as they can at your expense.
Republican vs. Democrat = two sides of the same coin. Companies are in business to make money... duh. Our representatives are "supposed" to represent our interests--"our" as in "we the people". Of course, if they were ever to do that, I'm sure half the population would faint from the shock.
you have a choice though: You're not forced to do business with anyone...Except the Gov't.
I can't see why making a profit = evil If I am selling something, I want the highest price I can get for it. Does that make me evil? If I am buying something I want to pay the least amount I can for it. Does that make me evil?
Such Republican political talking points. Keep in mind that Corporate = profit -> worse than waste because they take as much extras as they can at your expense.
(Corporate costs + profits) is still less $ than (gov't inefficiency + no profits). And that is the formula that matters.
Such Republican political talking points. Keep in mind that Corporate = profit -> worse than waste because they take as much extras as they can at your expense.
So do you mean to imply that companies should give away their goods/services for free??
Except corporations earn their money, they don't steal it by Federal mandate just to set it on fire in corrupt waste-filled bullcrap.
Just look at oil, with all the screaming that goes on about Exxon profits, government makes 6X the "profit" off a gallon of gas than Exxon does. Exxon makes about $0.10/gal profit per gallon and when you sell as much product as they do it equates to insane amounts of profit, in the tens of billions of dollars.
BUT, the Federal government excise tax is $0.184/gal plus there is state excise tax, sales tax etc. In California for example, while Exxon makes their hefty $0.10 per gallon, government makes $0.639/gal. »www.californiagasprices. ··· nfo.aspx So when evil corporate Exxon makes $10B, the goverment rakes in well over $60B. When evil Exxon makes $40B, the government rakes in well over $240B.
PLUS government gets to tax Exxon on those billions in profit and they tax the crap out of everyone who works at Exxon (in the U.S.)...even more insane government profit off Exxon's efforts. Meanwhile government didn't do a damn thing for it except endlessly vilify them.
It's not that profit is evil. It's the lying that people do to get it, and get more of it, that's evil. It's that whole "money is the root of all evil" thing. Those who seek it go to the places where they can get it.
No, I'm just pointing out that when someone claims that Gov't is just plain wasteful, the other option is to hire a company to do the same job. When the Gov't does it, there may be waste, but not necessarily. When a company does it, much more cost will be extracted from the citizens because a profit *must* be earned. And typically, gov't waste is a pittance compared to corporate profits earned on our backs. This is particularly inherent is gov't backed monopolies like communications.
Uhhh... the cost of gas going from $1.75 to over $4 a gallon was not Gov't profit. That was legalized theft from the corporate sector - the same sector that is getting socialized bailouts.
Wrong. It was supply and demand. Increased demand from China and India put pressure on a limited resource along with speculators and it was OPEC and other petro-nations that got the biggest money...funding idiots like Hugo Chavez.
Exxon got their money from the pure volume of purchases and government got theirs by theft.
And given that sales tax (8.75% here in Cali) is on the price of the gas, the more expensive the gas got, the more insane profits the government made on it. The California sales tax alone eclipses the profits Exxon makes on the gas in this state.
In fact when prices started to drop, Sacramento pissed and moaned, wanting to raise the excise tax to compensate for the drop in obscene sales tax revenues that they had reaped and quickly wasted.
Oh, sorry, you're right. China and India went out and found their own supply - that's why the price went down. NOT! If you understood how the futures market (and other trading) works, you'd understand that the cost was a result of artificial demand. Why do you think the cost dropped by 50% in 1 month - right around the threats of investigation?
Enron's stock jockies did the same thing in CA. They went down for it.
But I didn't say that companies should give away their goods/services for free? Did I? It is worse for the citizen because they are paying more for the same thing. But companies have a right to earn a profit. If I can get health care as an option from the gov't for less because no profit, I'll appreciate that option.
No guy, the world economy took a massive shit over a period of just a few weeks and that is the ONLY reason the price dropped. Oil is sold on the futures market and you had oil producers producing and stockpiling tons of oil based on economic conditions and demand before the economy went over the cliff. Oil traders see the economy instantly tank and they get out and fast, futures prices tank. So now you have few takers for the supply and like all inventories they were far larger than any demand...so the price dropped.
Now we are starting to see the signs of an economic recovery so what is happening, oil is back to $70bbl because traders see increases future demand, oil producers are producing at rates suitable for a tanked economy instead of a recovered one.
Simply put, with the dying economy you had dying demand, price drops. With a recovering economy you have resurgent demand, price is going up. And even with a mediocre recovery, the huge inventory imbalance that got the price way down so fast, starts to correct itself and the price goes back up just as it is doing now.
But I didn't say that companies should give away their goods/services for free?
You very clearly stated that making a profit is worse than government waste. Hence, you are saying that a company making no profit is good. A company making no profit (a non-profit if you will) is essentially giving its goods/services away for free after they have covered their own expenses. The economy couldnt exist if every company was non-profit, so your argument is fundamentally flawed.
It is worse for the citizen because they are paying more for the same thing.
How do you figure that? The money needs to come from somewhere. If you arent paying for it directly it is financed by taxes. Given how badly the government manages these programs, the end result is you will pay more that you would have for an inferior product/service.
But companies have a right to earn a profit. If I can get health care as an option from the gov't for less because no profit, I'll appreciate that option.
You arent really getting it for less. The money for health care still needs to come from someplace, so the gub'ment will need to raise taxes to cover the difference.
They see it as free so long as someone else is paying. They aren't concerned with the burdens their thieving and leeching puts on the productive elements of society.
Thankfully we are not on the only ones who recognize the total failure of government.
Hey, one thing can be better or worse than another, but rating the value doesn't invalidate the service. You insist on stating that I said that services should be given away - this was never said or implied. It's a stupid idea anyway.
Simple solution to the E-Rate program, just narrow it down to what it was suppose to be for, to enable Internet access at schools and libraries. Right now, schools can purchase servers, workstations, switches, access points, etc. on the program. Eliminate the ability to do that and you fix most of what is wrong with E-Rate.
Re: Gov't and clear goals don't belong in the same sentence
said by wifi4milez :
You arent really getting it for less. The money for health care still needs to come from someplace, so the gub'ment will need to raise taxes to cover the difference.
Sure, but since no profit needs to be earned on the gov't insurance, the cost will be much lower to the citizen,or they'll get more for their money.
Reading the eSchool News today highlights the GAO's report. A separate company, Funds for Learning LLC, found about $5 Billion in unused funds for the eRate program. A provision in the eRate program says that those funds can be rolled over, but that this "gap" is still an alarming trend in the oversight and administration of eRate because it continues year after year.
It takes the business manager and myself to go through eRate for our school. We are incredibly small, and I shudder to think what some huge districts have to go through. They must have to pay a company to deal with eRate or at least have somebody full time to focus just on that process. It is an absolute mockery of what a "streamlined" process should be. Our district needs those funds and that program does work, but the competitive bidding process is a joke, the whole thing is a slush fund. Good grief it needs fixing.
