Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Bell Tolls for Thee" data-source="post: 131750483" data-attributes="member: 1812660">I'm all for the federal government paying for the interstate.&nbsp; Especially since they used that funding to compel the universal 21 year old drinking age across all states which is another form of federal overreach in my opinion.&nbsp; Hell, I'd be elated if what you said was all that was in the bill even though I think it still enables the states to abdicate their duty.&nbsp; Unfortunately those infrastructure items you mention are barely a majority of the spending.&nbsp;&nbsp; The power grid includes money for &quot;environmental justice&quot; and resilience which is a nebulous term and reeks of another possible Solyndra debacle.&nbsp; Is that &quot;infrastructure&quot;? What about universal pre-K?&nbsp; 2 years of tax payer funded community college?&nbsp; Adding additional benefits to Medicare even though those receiving benefits currently are costing more than working are putting in?&nbsp; Those are not infrastructure items, it's more pork just crammed in.&nbsp; Whether you are for or against those pork items, its bad governance to have the legislature pass big packages like this where the debate and public discourse is only about a fraction of what's in the law.&nbsp; This is not to mention what could be crammed into budget reconciliation later.Personally I'm not for any of these justice movements where some qualifier is put in front of it.&nbsp; The goal is that justice is justice and doesn't need a qualifier.&nbsp; However there is no doubt it is not infrastructure and only crammed in because it's not likely to do well as a stand alone issue.&nbsp; I'm not for tax payers subsidizing pre-K which has been proven to be useless in and of itself.&nbsp; Active parents is what actually improves outcomes.&nbsp; This sounds like just extending the education system which is already a ponderous system of bureaucracy that isn't very efficient with results compared to what is spent.&nbsp; I'm also not for the taxpayers subsidizing 2 years of college as we are already subsidizing the bloated student loan program.&nbsp; We've also proven that just pushing more people into college has not improved outcomes, it's actually just dumbed down the college curriculum. Thus creating a large number of college educated 24-26 year olds without any useful skills or knowledge but rather grievances and victim complexes.&nbsp; I'd be open to it if it was only for STEM fields, but unfortunately most college degrees are social studies like political science or communications.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Bell Tolls for Thee, post: 131750483, member: 1812660"] I'm all for the federal government paying for the interstate. Especially since they used that funding to compel the universal 21 year old drinking age across all states which is another form of federal overreach in my opinion. Hell, I'd be elated if what you said was all that was in the bill even though I think it still enables the states to abdicate their duty. Unfortunately those infrastructure items you mention are barely a majority of the spending. The power grid includes money for "environmental justice" and resilience which is a nebulous term and reeks of another possible Solyndra debacle. Is that "infrastructure"? What about universal pre-K? 2 years of tax payer funded community college? Adding additional benefits to Medicare even though those receiving benefits currently are costing more than working are putting in? Those are not infrastructure items, it's more pork just crammed in. Whether you are for or against those pork items, its bad governance to have the legislature pass big packages like this where the debate and public discourse is only about a fraction of what's in the law. This is not to mention what could be crammed into budget reconciliation later. Personally I'm not for any of these justice movements where some qualifier is put in front of it. The goal is that justice is justice and doesn't need a qualifier. However there is no doubt it is not infrastructure and only crammed in because it's not likely to do well as a stand alone issue. I'm not for tax payers subsidizing pre-K which has been proven to be useless in and of itself. Active parents is what actually improves outcomes. This sounds like just extending the education system which is already a ponderous system of bureaucracy that isn't very efficient with results compared to what is spent. I'm also not for the taxpayers subsidizing 2 years of college as we are already subsidizing the bloated student loan program. We've also proven that just pushing more people into college has not improved outcomes, it's actually just dumbed down the college curriculum. Thus creating a large number of college educated 24-26 year olds without any useful skills or knowledge but rather grievances and victim complexes. I'd be open to it if it was only for STEM fields, but unfortunately most college degrees are social studies like political science or communications. [/QUOTE]

Name