FULLY Fund Government Initiative:

[King of the Americas]

Message:

Government Programs have both motive and goal: Why We do something & what We are trying to do.

Their failure can come from an initial design flaw, or an implementation or procedural mistake.

However, the most profound 'hurdle' that our current Government Programs obstacle about is UNDERFUNDING.

One can NOT underfund an initiative, expect the same results predicted originally, and then accuse the Program of design failure when it doesn't 'exceed every expectation' imaginable.

So, I say we should FULLY FUND every single Government Program or Legislated Initiative currently in place. THEN, and only then will we be able to assign sincere design flaws with any kind of specificity. Once We have a genuine understanding of what 'works', We can apply more accurate 'cuts' to that which does not work.

I am gonna e-mail THIS to EVERY media outlet I can conceive. (Unless you think it needs editing...)

Will you help me?

It won't cost you anything, and the ONLY thing it promises is 'better efficiency', through the more accurate use of our resources.

In conclusion, I promise you better days through better ways, IF you are willing to help me help us...






-- King, North Texas

[NoZed Avenger]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
Message:
However, the most profound 'hurdle' that our current Government Programs obstacle about is UNDERFUNDING.


Bwahahahahaha. . .haha . . . snort. . . .

Oh, man. Sorry. It just doesn't get any better.


It won't cost you anything...


But wait. It just DID.

Stop it. You're killing me.

[King of the Americas]

...is only exceeded by your lack of intellectual depth.

[Jocko]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
Message:

Government Programs have both motive and goal: Why We do something & what We are trying to do.

Unless the program is pork - and your pork is someone else's program... and vice-versa. Or are you saying the government has never wasted a dime on stupid projects designed to create an election-year bump in some inconsequenial local economy?

Their failure can come from an initial design flaw, or an implementation or procedural mistake.

Fair enough. Sounds like we should keep a skeptical eye on every project the government wants to fund - after all, some are flawed and some won't be implemented correctly.

However, the most profound 'hurdle' that our current Government Programs obstacle about is UNDERFUNDING.

Uh... what? I thought you just intimated that we ought to keep a skeptical eye on federal programs - and now you want to hand out blank checks? What about those programs with "initial design flaws"?

One can NOT underfund an initiative, expect the same results predicted originally, and then accuse the Program of design failure when it doesn't 'exceed every expectation' imaginable.

So failures are due to underfunding, not because many of these programs are wasteful, bloated pork factories that aren't REALLY designed to address the social ills in their names, but to help bolster some senator's local polls?

Would you conversely agree that programs that ARE fully funded and still fail, they should be withdrawn at once? Since underfunding is themost "profound hurdle," success should be a simple matter once we're past the money thing, right? (I can't think of a single noteworthy program that isn't - can you?)

So, I say we should FULLY FUND every single Government Program or Legislated Initiative currently in place. THEN, and only then will we be able to assign sincere design flaws with any kind of specificity.

And I suppose you can't diagnose what's wrong with your Ford Pinto unless you've pinned the spedometer, either. Good thinking, Friedman.

Again - once funding is removed as an obstacle, would you agree that programs in failure should be immediately canceled? Let's say for the sake of argument that an arbitrary measure of "failure" is not reaching 85% of its intended result.

Once We have a genuine understanding of what 'works', We can apply more accurate 'cuts' to that which does not work.

I was wondering when you'd get to this. "Cuts"?! I would think that any program that fails in spite of full funding (and again, I'd like you to name one that matters) should be immediately canceled!

If all programs deserve full funding, then it stands to reason that failures deserve immediate termination, not "cuts."

I am gonna e-mail THIS to EVERY media outlet I can conceive. (Unless you think it needs editing...)

I think YOU need editing. And a solid dose of high school economics. Other than that, I've seen spam from Mexico with worse spelling... but not by much.

Will you help me?

No. I have filters on my mailbox because of people like you.

It won't cost you anything, and the ONLY thing it promises is 'better efficiency', through the more accurate use of our resources.

Fully funding every last program - assuming it isn't already the case - most certainly WILL cost something.

Oh, I keep forgetting, you're a welfare leech and WE'RE the taxpayers. You meant it would cost YOU nothing. But of course.

And history as shown, if you want to improve the functioning of a government program, all you need to do is throw money at it. Just look at the schools!

In conclusion, I promise you better days through better ways, IF you are willing to help me help us...

Sorry, I'm speechless here. You're priceless, buddy! Good luck with the email campaign. Really.

:dl:

[Luke T.]

I'm going to have to quote my friend Alexis de Tocqueville on this, since I just read this not five minutes ago:


The last cause which frequently renders a democratic government dearer than any other is, that a democracy does not always succeed in moderating its expenditure, because it does not understand the art of being economical. As the designs which it entertains are frequently changed, and the agents of those designs are still more frequently removed, its undertakings are often ill conducted or left unfinished: in the former case the State spends sums out of all proportion to the end which it proposes to accomplish; in the second, the expense itself is unprofitable.

[Mr Manifesto]

I'm still waiting for the chaos and madness from Mars being its closest to Earth.

Luke T: I may have read your quote wrong, but concerning projects being unfinished because they're unprofitable: don't private companies do exactly that? Not finish a project if it's unprofitable?

[Jocko]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
don't private companies do exactly that? Not finish a project if it's unprofitable?

It's called throwing good money after bad, and that's a disticntion between a company accountable to its shareholders and a government accountable to no one - at least no more frequently than every 4 years.

As to KOA and the Mars thing, don't hold your breath. Follow-through has never been one of his strong points. Now, if only there were more funding for the programs that keep him free from work so he can rant on the internet all day....!

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
I'm still waiting for the chaos and madness from Mars being its closest to Earth.

Luke T: I may have read your quote wrong, but concerning projects being unfinished because they're unprofitable: don't private companies do exactly that? Not finish a project if it's unprofitable?

Unfortunately, this happens far more frequently in the gummint. Having worked for the U.S. for a little over 20 years, one of my favorite things I ever heard anyone say/complain was that the problem with the government is that it doesn't have to make a profit. :D

[CFLarsen]

KOA,

Tell me something: What do you do, when you are not posting here? You seem to be coming out of the woodworks occasionally, hatching "new", "brilliant" ideas that are anything but. Each time, you are thoroughly trounced, then you "retire", only to bounce back sometime after, completely unaware that nobody forgets your previous....endeavours...

I haven't timed your comebacks, so perhaps you could tell me: What do you base your "revival tours" on? The moon cycles? The feeding patterns of oysters? The messages received from The Greys?

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Luke T.


Unfortunately, this happens far more frequently in the gummint. Having worked for the U.S. for a little over 20 years, one of my favorite things I ever heard anyone say/complain was that the problem with the government is that it doesn't have to make a profit. :D

That's true, but haven't some of humankind's greatest acheivements been the unprofitable ones? How much money was made from the moon landing, for example? What private company would fund a venture like that?

[Luke T.]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


That's true, but haven't some of humankind's greatest acheivements been the unprofitable ones? How much money was made from the moon landing, for example? What private company would fund a venture like that?

I was listening to the Nixon-Kennedy debates on tape a couple weeks ago. These debates took place in October 1960. Kennedy expressed a great deal of fear that the U.S. was perceived as about to be overcome by the U.S.S.R. in the math and science fields, merely on the basis of the success of Sputnik and the Russian space program. It was a public relations nightmare.

We had to go to the moon. Image is far more significant than it appears at first glance, if you will excuse the lame pun. And creating a strong image has payoffs that can't be expressed neatly on a balance sheet, but payoffs it does indeed have on the world political stage.

If we were perceived as losers in the hard sciences, then the U.S.S.R. would have gained a lot of allure.

So going to the moon was extremely profitable.

[Jude]

Just curious, but how much is Honda making with their bipedal robot?

[peptoabysmal]

Originally posted by Luke T.


I was listening to the Nixon-Kennedy debates on tape a couple weeks ago. These debates took place in October 1960. Kennedy expressed a great deal of fear that the U.S. was perceived as about to be overcome by the U.S.S.R. in the math and science fields, merely on the basis of the success of Sputnik and the Russian space program. It was a public relations nightmare.

We had to go to the moon. Image is far more significant than it appears at first glance, if you will excuse the lame pun. And creating a strong image has payoffs that can't be expressed neatly on a balance sheet, but payoffs it does indeed have on the world political stage.

If we were perceived as losers in the hard sciences, then the U.S.S.R. would have gained a lot of allure.

So going to the moon was extremely profitable.

It was also very profitable in the trickle-down of technology to the private and military sectors.

[Crossbow]

I doubt that there is enough money in the entire country to fund every single government initiative.

To name just a few government initiatives: SDI, Space Station, Mission to Mars, New Military Aircraft, New Warships, New Military Helicopters, New Space Shuttles, Cancer research, Clean Energy development, Educational Grants for anyone that needs them, and vast Environmental Clean-up.

All this will cost some very, very, very serious money!

[King of the Americas]

MANY programs should be CUT, entirely.

MOST 'would-be usefull' ones however are NOT fully funded and thus redered partially disabled.

ONLY when we fully fund ALL of iniated programs will we be able to see a sincere representation of what actually works.

When we fianlly find out what works, THEN we an eliminate completely that which doesn't..

---

*What do I do when I am not here and what stimulates my returns..?

Well, I couldn't afford Ronald Reagan's actual astrologer, so I have his assistant. I am not sure she is entirely reliable, but I figure she is bound to be right sooner or later, it would be a shame to waste all that I have paid her, before she actually IS.

THAT was a joke.

I spend most of my time trying to 'affect positive change', on my environment. Sometimes my targets are VERY local, while other times they are aimed at audiences as global/NON-local as the World Wide Web.

This place is actually one of my favorite internet outlets for intellectual sparing. Whatever I manage to post, will almost always land me a half a dozen 'intelligent' retorts. Many time I am forced to do a double or even triple-take on my original thesis.

In short I come here, in an attempt to be proven wrong, which happens, sometime more than I would like, but it is good for me.

At all, "Failure is only the opportunity to begin again, more intelligently." -H. Ford

[NoZed Avenger]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
This place is actually one of my favorite internet outlets for intellectual sparing. Whatever I manage to post, will almost always land me a half a dozen 'intelligent' retorts. Many time I am forced to do a double or even triple-take on my original thesis.

In short I come here, in an attempt to be proven wrong, which happens, sometime more than I would like, but it is good for me.

If this is truly your goal, the tone in your first post undercuts it. My response to your post -- ill mannered as it was -- was a direct reaction to the "bringing TRVTH from on high" tone of your initial message.

If you had begun your post with "Here is an idea I am thinking of, here are the benefits I see, please give me some feedback" then you would have received a completely different response.

N/A

[Luke T.]

An example of a lot of money gone to waste is our educational system. We keep pouring money into it, and our kids aren't being well served. It takes more than money to fix a problem.

[King of the Americas]

But that's not who I am.

I do what I do, BECAUSE I believe it needs to be done.

I am not so much looking to 'discuss' my ideas, right off. I'd rather see what stones get thrown at it and where, then I may or may not choose to defend the aspects being attacked.

I think of myself as a leader, capable of amendment.

[NoZed Avenger]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
But that's not who I am.

I do what I do, BECAUSE I believe it needs to be done.

I am not so much looking to 'discuss' my ideas, right off. I'd rather see what stones get thrown at it and where . . . .


/shrug

Ok. As long as you know that you are seriuously limiting the number of serious replies, if not eliminating them entirely.

[Skeptic]

You have NO IDEA how the real world works, do you, KOA?

[King of the Americas]

Well, admittedly I don't know EVERYTHING.
;)

[King of the Americas]

..benefit PASSED, but VASTLY underfunded.

How can we expect it to succeed???

The result will be the furthering perception that government programs don't work...

WHY create a program and then NOT fully fund it?

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by Luke T.
An example of a lot of money gone to waste is our educational system. We keep pouring money into it, and our kids aren't being well served. It takes more than money to fix a problem.

Another good example, until very recently when effective reforms were enacted, was the welfare system.

[Kodiak]

Originally posted by King of the Americas
..benefit PASSED, but VASTLY underfunded.

How can we expect it to succeed???

The result will be the furthering perception that government programs don't work...

WHY create a program and then NOT fully fund it?

Revamping a program that large MUST be done in stages and funded incrementally based on safe estimates of future federal revenue.

The dems hated it (of course), but the AARP spent $7 million in an ad campaign supporting it.