The Republican party in 2014-2016 must come out as PRO infrastructure and techn

[ScienceRocks]

The Republican party in 2014-2016 must come out as PRO infrastructure and technology. We should define our self as a party that loves the free market and small government, but we must support common sense local infrastructure and schools.

Our party should accept that the government has a place at the local level when it comes to do with police, fire, etc. I'm saying this as someone that believes that we should lean on the private sector to do most things as a society.

Anything else is a extreme and a loser. We should be the party of free markets but we must realize that most of society at the local level wants some government....This is why we pay taxes.

WE MUST SPEAK OUT that we want infrastructure
WE must speak out that we support our nations edge in science and technology
We must speak out for the private sector!

 

[Oddball]

If you believe in the free market and small gubmint, why would you need "investments" in technology and infrastructure out of the taxpayer's pocket?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I was unaware that Conservatives were ever against any of this. I think it's more a matter of how best to get there.

 

[eflatminor]

Our party should accept that the government has a place at the local level when it comes to do with police, fire, etc.

And which enumerated power authorizes that?

In essence, you're suggesting the good people of Indiana should be on the hook for the cost of police enforcement in Los Angeles. I'll pass on that one.

I'm saying this as someone that believes that we should lean on the private sector to do most things as a society.

On this we agree.

...we must realize that most of society at the local level wants some government....This is why we pay taxes.

They're free to have as much local government at the local level as the locals want, just as long as they don't infringe on rights. The feds are a different story.

WE MUST SPEAK OUT that we want infrastructure

What? More trains? Pass.

 

[ScienceRocks]

If you believe in the free market and small gubmint, why would you need "investments" in technology and infrastructure out of the taxpayer's pocket?

1. This is how this country has worked for the past 100 years. We're not a pure capitalist society but a hybrid.
2. This is the way the rest of the first world does it. How do you compete against such without the ability to compete?

The only case in point of your belief is the robber barons of the early 20th century. Under such a system we could compete but it wouldn't be pretty for the little guy.

 

[tjvh]

The Republican party in 2014-2016 must come out as PRO infrastructure and technology. We should define our self as a party that loves the free market and small government, but we must support common sense local infrastructure and schools.

Our party should accept that the government has a place at the local level when it comes to do with police, fire, etc. I'm saying this as someone that believes that we should lean on the private sector to do most things as a society.

Anything else is a extreme and a loser. We should be the party of free markets but we must realize that most of society at the local level wants some government....This is why we pay taxes.

WE MUST SPEAK OUT that we want infrastructure
WE must speak out that we support our nations edge in science and technology
We must speak out for the private sector!

I don't think the Republican Party is against technology at all, I think they are against having the Taxpayer's offer up a blank check to subsidize businesses that are more than capable of competing on their own IF their technologies are up to par, which companies like Solyndra obviously were not.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Yes, by all means, republicans. Instead of hiding behind limited constitutional govt. rhetoric, get up there and stand loud and proud next to your Democrat Party brethren.

Let the nation know that you're all about infrastructure and that means MORE TAXES from an already broke populous to fund an out of control government.

That should slide a few more folks toward our position.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Our party should accept that the government has a place at the local level when it comes to do with police, fire, etc.

And which enumerated power authorizes that?

In essence, you're suggesting the good people of Indiana should be on the hook for the cost of police enforcement in Los Angeles. I'll pass on that one.

I'm saying this as someone that believes that we should lean on the private sector to do most things as a society.

On this we agree.

...we must realize that most of society at the local level wants some government....This is why we pay taxes.

They're free to have as much local government at the local level as the locals want, just as long as they don't infringe on rights. The feds are a different story.

WE MUST SPEAK OUT that we want infrastructure

What? More trains? Pass.

1. Who says the federal government hires police? lol
2. What constitutional amendment allows the president to bomb other countries anytime he pleases? Or a standing army???
3. Well, if we wish to compete we must invest into tech and infrastructure that benefits the nation as a whole. Do you support nuclear? Would you like to see more of that? Or oil drilling? New tech is good.
4. The highway(innerstate). Now if a state wants to build a bullet train=good luck for them.

We need to get the hell away from this anti-infrastructure belief. RUN away! This is a loser.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Matthew I'm thinking that a better solution would be for you to come out in 2014 & 2016 as a liberal independent. That's what you sound like.

Just my two cents

 

[Oddball]

If you believe in the free market and small gubmint, why would you need "investments" in technology and infrastructure out of the taxpayer's pocket?

1. This is how this country has worked for the past 100 years. We're not a pure capitalist society but a hybrid.
2. This is the way the rest of the first world does it. How do you compete against such without the ability to compete?

The only case in point of your belief is the robber barons of the early 20th century. Under such a system we could compete but it wouldn't be pretty for the little guy.

1) Appeal to tradition and circular reasoning.

2) Keeping up with the Joneses and begging the question.

Robber Barons: Non sequitur.

Thanks for playing.....

 

[ScienceRocks]

Yes, by all means, republicans. Instead of hiding behind limited constitutional govt. rhetoric, get up there and stand loud and proud next to your Democrat Party brethren.

Let the nation know that you're all about infrastructure and that means MORE TAXES from an already broke populous to fund an out of control government.

That should slide a few more folks toward our position.

and this is how this country becomes a second rate shit hole. What happened to the dream of wanting to be the best?

 

[ScienceRocks]

If you believe in the free market and small gubmint, why would you need "investments" in technology and infrastructure out of the taxpayer's pocket?

1. This is how this country has worked for the past 100 years. We're not a pure capitalist society but a hybrid.
2. This is the way the rest of the first world does it. How do you compete against such without the ability to compete?

The only case in point of your belief is the robber barons of the early 20th century. Under such a system we could compete but it wouldn't be pretty for the little guy.

1) Appeal to tradition and circular reasoning.

2) Keeping up with the Joneses and begging the question.

Robber Barons: Non sequitur.

Thanks for playing.....

How do we remain a first world nation with the best with your reasoning?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Matthew I'm thinking that a better solution would be for you to come out in 2014 & 2016 as a liberal independent. That's what you sound like.

Just my two cents

My social beliefs won't allow me.

 

[Oddball]

1. This is how this country has worked for the past 100 years. We're not a pure capitalist society but a hybrid.
2. This is the way the rest of the first world does it. How do you compete against such without the ability to compete?

The only case in point of your belief is the robber barons of the early 20th century. Under such a system we could compete but it wouldn't be pretty for the little guy.

1) Appeal to tradition and circular reasoning.

2) Keeping up with the Joneses and begging the question.

Robber Barons: Non sequitur.

Thanks for playing.....

How do we remain a first world nation with the best with your reasoning?

By ceasing to pretend that gubmint "investments" solve problems, for starters.

 

[OKTexas]

Yes, by all means, republicans. Instead of hiding behind limited constitutional govt. rhetoric, get up there and stand loud and proud next to your Democrat Party brethren.

Let the nation know that you're all about infrastructure and that means MORE TAXES from an already broke populous to fund an out of control government.

That should slide a few more folks toward our position.

and this is how this country becomes a second rate shit hole. What happened to the dream of wanting to be the best?

When the feds are involved in infrastructure projects they cost 2-3 times what a state could do the same project for. The feds should leave infrastructure to the states along with the money they suck out of the state economies. Unless technology is defense related the feds have no roll in its development that's the job of the private sector.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Yes, by all means, republicans. Instead of hiding behind limited constitutional govt. rhetoric, get up there and stand loud and proud next to your Democrat Party brethren.

Let the nation know that you're all about infrastructure and that means MORE TAXES from an already broke populous to fund an out of control government.

That should slide a few more folks toward our position.

and this is how this country becomes a second rate shit hole. What happened to the dream of wanting to be the best?

When the feds are involved in infrastructure projects they cost 2-3 times what a state could do the same project for. The feds should leave infrastructure to the states along with the money they suck out of the state economies. Unless technology is defense related the feds have no roll in its development that's the job of the private sector.

I'm sorry I didn't define it as states, but I'm really talking about states with infrastructure. Now with some cases when it has to do with the nation could be staired by the feds.

Believe me I understand our fucked up system cost 2-3+ times more then it should. It's a fucking joke.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

and this is how this country becomes a second rate shit hole. What happened to the dream of wanting to be the best?

When the feds are involved in infrastructure projects they cost 2-3 times what a state could do the same project for. The feds should leave infrastructure to the states along with the money they suck out of the state economies. Unless technology is defense related the feds have no roll in its development that's the job of the private sector.

I'm sorry I didn't define it as states, but I'm really talking about states with infrastructure. Now with some cases when it has to do with the nation could be staired by the feds.

Believe me I understand our fucked up system cost 2-3+ times more then it should. It's a fucking joke.

Most every single state is broke and runs a deficit. The States were suppose to kick funds up to the federal govt. to keep it running. So you want states to ask the federal govt. for money to fund infrastructure projects? Shovel ready anyone?

 

[eflatminor]

Our party should accept that the government has a place at the local level when it comes to do with police, fire, etc.

And which enumerated power authorizes that?

In essence, you're suggesting the good people of Indiana should be on the hook for the cost of police enforcement in Los Angeles. I'll pass on that one.



On this we agree.



They're free to have as much local government at the local level as the locals want, just as long as they don't infringe on rights. The feds are a different story.

WE MUST SPEAK OUT that we want infrastructure

What? More trains? Pass.

1. Who says the federal government hires police?

You implied the federal government should support local police/fire. If I misunderstood your position, my apologies. If all you meant was that local Republicans should support local police, well, that's fine.

2. What constitutional amendment allows the president to bomb other countries anytime he pleases?

None. One reason you'll NEVER see me supporting such actions. Probably true of any libertarian/classical liberal. Of course, that has nothing to do with federal taxes being spent on local police/fire/infrastructure.

3. Well, if we wish to compete we must invest into tech and infrastructure that benefits the nation as a whole.

Yet you call yourself a limited government guy? I think you miss the point of how capital investment works. Central planners NEVER direct investments as efficiently as free people in a free society making voluntary choices. If you want more tech and infrastructure investments, get government off the backs of those that fund such projects.

Do you support nuclear? Would you like to see more of that? Or oil drilling? New tech is good.

I support what consumers voluntarily demand. What I want to see I get to support with my dollar. You get to do the same. Again, you're looking to central planners to decide what advancements in what technology gets made. BIG mistake.

4. The highway(innerstate). Now if a state wants to build a bullet train=good luck for them.

If a state wants to invest in road construction in their state, fine. Personally, I'd much prefer private roads, which are always better kept, cheaper and more efficient.

We need to get the hell away from this anti-infrastructure belief. RUN away! This is a loser.

The more you write, the more you come off like a progressive Democrat.

 

[Troubled_CA]

When the feds are involved in infrastructure projects they cost 2-3 times what a state could do the same project for.

you pull this out of your BUT?

A link too difficult for you?

sounds like a FOX news faux fact.

when you put PIE in the SKY facts in a post,
a LINK helps your Flapping Gums, prove a point.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Yes, by all means, republicans. Instead of hiding behind limited constitutional govt. rhetoric, get up there and stand loud and proud next to your Democrat Party brethren.

Let the nation know that you're all about infrastructure and that means MORE TAXES from an already broke populous to fund an out of control government.

That should slide a few more folks toward our position.

and this is how this country becomes a second rate shit hole. What happened to the dream of wanting to be the best?

How can we be the best when we continue spending ourselves into a hole? How can we be the best when we allow illegal immigrants to vote? How can we be the best when we are arming terrorists overseas? How can we be the best when we are spying on people? How can America be the best when we are literally paying people to be useless? Answer those questions before you lament the fact that we are no longer the best. We are already a second rate shit hole because we are focused on the wrong things.