Voting against interests

[Marvin the Martian]

One of the chapters of Michael Lewis' The Fifth Risk is online, it was a Vanity Fair article. It details the story of someone moving from Kurachi to Edinboro, PA and what he does when he grows up.

Edinboro is a small town of under 7000 between Cleveland and Buffalo. It is a fairly poor town, and Ali Zaidi's family was poorer than most. But the area is heavily Republican, and he was a Republican. He does transform into a Democrat. Some excerpts from that:

If you had asked Ali, before he went to New Orleans, what he thought of people who didn’t help themselves, he would have said, “My parents had to start all over again. What’s the big deal? Just suck it up.” The sight of little kids post-Katrina jolted him. “It kind of blew my mind: if you are in kindergarten you should at least get a fair shot. It was just eye-opening: to see how much your geography could determine the opportunities available to you.”​

​

Now he sensed that poverty came in many flavors. He’d been lucky to have his particular parents and his particular community. He was reminded of the first time he’d run on a track with spikes. “You just fly on the track.” The poor kids he saw in New Orleans were trying to run the same race in life that he was. But he was wearing spikes and they weren’t. “There’s a real idealism that you have to indulge to think that people in New Orleans were now going to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. There were no bootstraps.”​

​

Then it gets into his time in the Department of Agriculture:

A small fraction of its massive annual budget ($164 billion in 2016) was actually spent on farmers, but it financed and managed all these programs in rural America—including the free school lunch for kids living near the poverty line. “I’m sitting there looking at this,” said Ali. “The U.S.D.A. had subsidized the apartment my family had lived in. The hospital we used. The fire department. The town’s water. The electricity. It had paid for the food I had eaten.”​

​

Trump really worked to slash the USDA. And the citizens of Edinboro largely voted for Trump as did rural people around the country. Yet without the USDA much of rural America would struggle to feed their kids (school lunch), pay for new homes (FHA loans), rent apartments (USDA-financed Rural Rental Housing or Farm Labor Housing projects), have police (USDA Rural Development Funding) , or fire protection (also USDA Rural Development).

Is it that people in places like Edinboro really don't want all that? Or are they just unaware of what the government really does? Let's remember, the lower-middle class aren't paying massive taxes. People taking advantage of reduced school lunch, getting FHA loans, or needing help to buy a fire truck largely are consuming more tax money than they pay.

Below is the article, it is the chapter in the book I just finished. It isn't nearly as frightening as the chapter on the Department of Energy. But a quick look revealed it online.

Inside Trump’s Cruel Campaign Against the U.S.D.A.’s Scientists

When Trump’s political appointees arrived at the U.S.D.A., career employees were shocked by their new bosses’ lack of qualifications. Michael Lewis explores why Americans need to care.

www.vanityfair.com

 

[Sope Creek]

One of the chapters of Michael Lewis' The Fifth Risk is online, it was a Vanity Fair article. It details the story of someone moving from Kurachi to Edinboro, PA and what he does when he grows up.

Edinboro is a small town of under 7000 between Cleveland and Buffalo. It is a fairly poor town, and Ali Zaidi's family was poorer than most. But the area is heavily Republican, and he was a Republican. He does transform into a Democrat. Some excerpts from that:

If you had asked Ali, before he went to New Orleans, what he thought of people who didn’t help themselves, he would have said, “My parents had to start all over again. What’s the big deal? Just suck it up.” The sight of little kids post-Katrina jolted him. “It kind of blew my mind: if you are in kindergarten you should at least get a fair shot. It was just eye-opening: to see how much your geography could determine the opportunities available to you.”​

​

Now he sensed that poverty came in many flavors. He’d been lucky to have his particular parents and his particular community. He was reminded of the first time he’d run on a track with spikes. “You just fly on the track.” The poor kids he saw in New Orleans were trying to run the same race in life that he was. But he was wearing spikes and they weren’t. “There’s a real idealism that you have to indulge to think that people in New Orleans were now going to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. There were no bootstraps.”​

​

Then it gets into his time in the Department of Agriculture:

A small fraction of its massive annual budget ($164 billion in 2016) was actually spent on farmers, but it financed and managed all these programs in rural America—including the free school lunch for kids living near the poverty line. “I’m sitting there looking at this,” said Ali. “The U.S.D.A. had subsidized the apartment my family had lived in. The hospital we used. The fire department. The town’s water. The electricity. It had paid for the food I had eaten.”​

​

Trump really worked to slash the USDA. And the citizens of Edinboro largely voted for Trump as did rural people around the country. Yet without the USDA much of rural America would struggle to feed their kids (school lunch), pay for new homes (FHA loans), rent apartments (USDA-financed Rural Rental Housing or Farm Labor Housing projects), have police (USDA Rural Development Funding) , or fire protection (also USDA Rural Development).

Is it that people in places like Edinboro really don't want all that? Or are they just unaware of what the government really does? Let's remember, the lower-middle class aren't paying massive taxes. People taking advantage of reduced school lunch, getting FHA loans, or needing help to buy a fire truck largely are consuming more tax money than they pay.

Below is the article, it is the chapter in the book I just finished. It isn't nearly as frightening as the chapter on the Department of Energy. But a quick look revealed it online.

Inside Trump’s Cruel Campaign Against the U.S.D.A.’s Scientists

When Trump’s political appointees arrived at the U.S.D.A., career employees were shocked by their new bosses’ lack of qualifications. Michael Lewis explores why Americans need to care.

www.vanityfair.com

It's my fault that you posted this. 🤷‍♂️

 

[El Drado]

• I don't think people realize where the financial help originates from. Especially when the local government takes credit for the subsidy/help (think that was in that book too).
• Also, people vote against their interest if their identity with that political party is more important. I cannot remember which book it was (thinking fast & slow?), but it commented on In and Out groups. I think it is an incredibly interesting subject that is entirely overlooked.
• During the election, heard an interview from a women who needed obamacare, but there was no way she was going to vote for a democrat even though trump was trying to rid it.

 

[larsIU]

Is it that people in places like Edinboro really don't want all that? Or are they just unaware of what the government really does?

This is a huge problem. I get there are significant disagreements/opinions on big vs small government, there are so many (including myself) who have so little understanding of what the federal government actually does and how they fit into people's everyday lives. More importantly, many have no idea what would happen if that bureaucracy didn't exist.

 

[Sope Creek]

This is a huge problem. I get there are significant disagreements/opinions on big vs small government, there are so many (including myself) who have so little understanding of what the federal government actually does and how they fit into people's everyday lives. More importantly, many have no idea what would happen if that bureaucracy didn't exist.

Bingo. It's like a set of stairs under our feet, and we just assume they've always been there, with no care to who conceived of the need for them, who designed them, who constructed them, or who maintains them . . . .

If this is the Deep State that so many complain about . . . sign me up!!

 

[mcmurtry66]

Few understand the importance of gov and the role gov plays in providing services we all take for granted. When some are critical of the gov it's not regarding that; it's regarding whether they are being good stewards of our money, and what we're getting for our taxes. When i was in grad school studying public admin we reviewed agency budget requests sent to OMB. Never did an agency request less money. Never! Why? Because it sends the message they aren't needed as much as they thought. So they always ask for more money. Further, rarely do we hear of the outcomes of so many of the agencies. Successes, failures, etc. Periodically we get a glimpse into what goes wrong: i.e. with the CDC's many failures in our moment of need. But again to what consequence? There are no shareholders to answer to. No investors that'll back out. Gov always has the endless atm of joe public and that inherently is an issue. So no I won't get on this lefty rah rah rah gov thread j/k.

A few random points. Pay raises under the GS only average about 1-3%. What's more fed ees, while enjoying great benes and a shit ton of days off, are still paid less than private counterparts. So you can't begrudge the fed workforce imo.

Ultimately i'm not a fan and i would love to see massive restructuring. i know it has its warts but i really like sope's idea of more regional gov. and for what we pay in every year there's little reason we don't have health care coverage. a reallocation of priorities provides ample money for same. the ugly truth to all of this (that my conservative brethren won't want to hear) is that our discretionary spending is at more than 50% for military. at some point this needs to be revisited. that's where the money is....

 

[Sope Creek]

Few understand the importance of gov and the role gov plays in providing services we all take for granted. When some are critical of the gov it's not regarding that; it's regarding whether they are being good stewards of our money, and what we're getting for our taxes. When i was in grad school studying public admin we reviewed agency budget requests sent to OMB. Never did an agency request less money. Never! Why? Because it sends the message they aren't needed as much as they thought. So they always ask for more money. Further, rarely do we hear of the outcomes of so many of the agencies. Successes, failures, etc. Periodically we get a glimpse into what goes wrong: i.e. with the CDC's many failures in our moment of need. So no I won't get on this lefty rah rah rah gov thread j/k.

A few random points. Pay raises under the GS only average about 1-3%. What's more fed ees, while enjoying great benes and a shit ton of days off, are still paid less than private counterparts. So you can't begrudge the fed workforce imo.

Ultimately i'm not a fan and i would love to see massive restructuring. i know it has its warts but i really like sope's idea of more regional gov. and for what we pay in every year there's little reason we don't have health care coverage. a reallocation of priorities provides ample money for same. the ugly truth to all of this (that my conservative brethren won't want to hear) is that our discretionary spending is at more than 50% for military. at some point this needs to be revisited. that's where the money is....

You REALLY need a copy of The Fifth Risk. Hell, if I had your address I'd send you a copy . . . .

 

[mcmurtry66]

You REALLY need a copy of The Fifth Risk. Hell, if I had your address I'd send you a copy . . . .

i was in a ph.d. program for public admin before i dropped out and took the master's. i know how gov works. altho for you i will pick it up when i have more free time next month and read it. i also want to read the one on the pandemic that marv recommended

 

[hoosboot]

Few understand the importance of gov and the role gov plays in providing services we all take for granted. When some are critical of the gov it's not regarding that; it's regarding whether they are being good stewards of our money, and what we're getting for our taxes. When i was in grad school studying public admin we reviewed agency budget requests sent to OMB. Never did an agency request less money. Never! Why? Because it sends the message they aren't needed as much as they thought. So they always ask for more money. Further, rarely do we hear of the outcomes of so many of the agencies. Successes, failures, etc. Periodically we get a glimpse into what goes wrong: i.e. with the CDC's many failures in our moment of need. But again to what consequence? There are no shareholders to answer to. No investors that'll back out. Gov always has the endless atm of joe public and that inherently is an issue. So no I won't get on this lefty rah rah rah gov thread j/k.

A few random points. Pay raises under the GS only average about 1-3%. What's more fed ees, while enjoying great benes and a shit ton of days off, are still paid less than private counterparts. So you can't begrudge the fed workforce imo.

Ultimately i'm not a fan and i would love to see massive restructuring. i know it has its warts but i really like sope's idea of more regional gov. and for what we pay in every year there's little reason we don't have health care coverage. a reallocation of priorities provides ample money for same. the ugly truth to all of this (that my conservative brethren won't want to hear) is that our discretionary spending is at more than 50% for military. at some point this needs to be revisited. that's where the money is....

The budgeting phenomenon that you have identified isn't restricted to public administration. It happens in most large organizations. It's extremely rare for people to look at things in their purview and say, "We could definitely accomplish what I'm doing for cheaper and with fewer resources."

 

[mcmurtry66]

The budgeting phenomenon that you have identified isn't restricted to public administration. It happens in most large organizations. It's extremely rare for people to look at things in their purview and say, "We could definitely accomplish what I'm doing for cheaper and with fewer resources."

no i totally agree with that. it's the outcomes where the rub comes

 

[Sope Creek]

i was in a ph.d. program for public admin before i dropped out and took the master's. i know how gov works. altho for you i will pick it up when i have more free time next month and read it. i also want to read the one on the pandemic that marv recommended

Same author. Fifth Risk came first.

 

[mcmurtry66]

The budgeting phenomenon that you have identified isn't restricted to public administration. It happens in most large organizations. It's extremely rare for people to look at things in their purview and say, "We could definitely accomplish what I'm doing for cheaper and with fewer resources."

i think that if we ever want meaningful change; and to provide more and different things, such as universal healthcare we need to revisit some party stereotypes and how we do things. the stereotypes with the dems center around needing to do more (3.5 trillion) and how are we going to get it: soak the rich. taxes. the stereotype for the pubs are that we need 57% or whatever it is of our discretionary spending to go to military. but do we? there's so much we do that needs revisiting and rarely do we hear about it from our entrenched reps. it's ideological changes and it's personnel changes imo

 

[Sope Creek]

i think that if we ever want meaningful change; and to provide more and different things, such as universal healthcare we need to revisit some party stereotypes and how we do things. the stereotypes with the dems center around needing to do more (3.5 trillion) and how are we going to get it: soak the rich. taxes. the stereotype for the pubs are that we need 57% or whatever it is of our discretionary spending to go to military. but do we? there's so much we do that needs revisiting and rarely do we hear about it from our entrenched reps. it's ideological changes and it's personnel changes imo

Jump in any time.

 

[mcmurtry66]

The budgeting phenomenon that you have identified isn't restricted to public administration. It happens in most large organizations. It's extremely rare for people to look at things in their purview and say, "We could definitely accomplish what I'm doing for cheaper and with fewer resources."

we raise almost 4 trillion a year in taxes. that's an incredible amount of money. the question is and should always be are we getting enough out of that 4 trillion?

 

[bawlmer]

we raise almost 4 trillion a year in taxes. that's an incredible amount of money. the question is and should always be are we getting enough out of that 4 trillion?

THERE'S the rub. It's a different question than whether the budget is balanced.

We are now talking about spending as an investment in the future. That makes sense, but I'm concerned we aren't really assessing the ROI in any rigorous way.

 

[Sope Creek]

we raise almost 4 trillion a year in taxes. that's an incredible amount of money. the question is and should always be are we getting enough out of that 4 trillion?

Read the damned book.

You recounting that you "were" in a PhD program, and then took the Masters is like a law student who dropped out during the first semester claiming they know all about the law because they then worked for a county drivers license location.

Oh, and J. Irwin Miller used to say that he didn't mind paying taxes so long as they got value for the taxes paid. I agree with that . . . so long as we don't make perfection the enemy of the good.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

To expand to more than what I originally covered.

Solyndra is covered. The program that loaned money to Solyndra handed out lots of loans. Lots of loans. The program MADE money, even accounting for Solyndra. Yet the program was judged a failure due to one loan, Solyndra.

The DOE started a program called ARPA-E. ARPA-E appeared on a Heritage Foundation list of programs that should be entirely cut. The administrators invited Heritage leaders to meet them for lunch then come to their offices so they could show them what they do. At the lunch, they gave some quick examples of their projects. The chief money person for Heritage asked "so you are like DARPA?" They replied yes, they are like DARPA. She said "I like DARPA". DARPA had invented the Kevlar vest, her son was saved in Iraq by his kevlar vest. After lunch, the Heritage people said they didn't need to go to the offices. ARPA-E was removed from the list they wanted defunded.

Now, that is good that they were willing to sit down and talk to ARPA-E and change their mind. Big kuddos to them. But it also shows ARPA-E had made the list only because Heritage had no clue what ARPA-E does. In a nutshell, that is the problem government faces. People hate government programs because they don't know what they do.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Read the damned book.

You recounting that you "were" in a PhD program, and then took the Masters is like a law student who dropped out during the first semester claiming they know all about the law because they then worked for a county drivers license location.

Oh, and J. Irwin Miller used to say that he didn't mind paying taxes so long as they got value for the taxes paid. I agree with that . . . so long as we don't make perfection the enemy of the good.

and that's the point. what are we getting for our four trillion a year we raise. what are we getting out of 57% discretionary income earmarked for military spending.

 

[mcmurtry66]

To expand to more than what I originally covered.

Solyndra is covered. The program that loaned money to Solyndra handed out lots of loans. Lots of loans. The program MADE money, even accounting for Solyndra. Yet the program was judged a failure due to one loan, Solyndra.

The DOE started a program called ARPA-E. ARPA-E appeared on a Heritage Foundation list of programs that should be entirely cut. The administrators invited Heritage leaders to meet them for lunch then come to their offices so they could show them what they do. At the lunch, they gave some quick examples of their projects. The chief money person for Heritage asked "so you are like DARPA?" They replied yes, they are like DARPA. She said "I like DARPA". DARPA had invented the Kevlar vest, her son was saved in Iraq by his kevlar vest. After lunch, the Heritage people said they didn't need to go to the offices. ARPA-E was removed from the list they wanted defunded.

Now, that is good that they were willing to sit down and talk to ARPA-E and change their mind. Big kuddos to them. But it also shows ARPA-E had made the list only because Heritage had no clue what ARPA-E does. In a nutshell, that is the problem government faces. People hate government programs because they don't know what they do.

kevlar was invented at dupont in the 60s. it replaced steel in racing tires.

It's not only what they do; it's how they do it and how efficiently they do it and cost effectively they do it.

again marv (and there are myriad variables that go into this) but i was taken by the decline in poverty that attended the combo of stimulus checks and child care credits issued as checks instead of deductions. money in hand vs endless gov programs. the difference made was damn near immediate.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Read the damned book.

You recounting that you "were" in a PhD program, and then took the Masters is like a law student who dropped out during the first semester claiming they know all about the law because they then worked for a county drivers license location.

Oh, and J. Irwin Miller used to say that he didn't mind paying taxes so long as they got value for the taxes paid. I agree with that . . . so long as we don't make perfection the enemy of the good.

you bastard i finished the coursework. all of it. the dissertation seemed too hard and never ending.

 

[mcmurtry66]

THERE'S the rub. It's a different question than whether the budget is balanced.

We are now talking about spending as an investment in the future. That makes sense, but I'm concerned we aren't really assessing the ROI in any rigorous way.

you said what i've been trying to get across far more succinctly

 

[Sope Creek]

you bastard.

Yep. Now we're on the same wavelength.

 

[Sope Creek]

you bastard i finished the coursework. all of it. the dissertation seemed too hard and never ending.

And you know all of what the government does because you finished the coursework?

Just like a newly minted law grad knows how to practice law because they took all the coursework and passed the bar . . . oooooo-kay.

 

[Sope Creek]

you bastard i finished the coursework. all of it. the dissertation seemed too hard and never ending.

BTW, I apologize. I shouldn't have hit you that hard . . . although I thought you could take it.

I should've said something like "well, there's a difference between studying something and being a practitioner of it . . . and there's a difference between being a practitioner and a master. Kind of like Bryson DeChambeau being a practitioner of applied physics instead of just a student . . . and not quite being a master of it.

But you're right, I am a bastard . . . or more accurately, an asshole.

 

[mcmurtry66]

BTW, I apologize. I shouldn't have hit you that hard . . . although I thought you could take it.

I should've said something like "well, there's a difference between studying something and being a practitioner of it . . . and there's a difference between being a practitioner and a master. Kind of like Bryson DeChambeau being a practitioner of applied physics instead of just a student . . . and not quite being a master of it.

But you're right, I am a bastard . . . or more accurately, an asshole.

i was only teasing you sope! we're always good. twhat the gov does isn't a mystery. you can go to usa.gov and find most everything you need. what you won't find a lot of are outcomes. again (i recognize the myriad variables in play) but the impact on poverty from direct payments was telling.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

One of the chapters of Michael Lewis' The Fifth Risk is online, it was a Vanity Fair article. It details the story of someone moving from Kurachi to Edinboro, PA and what he does when he grows up.

Edinboro is a small town of under 7000 between Cleveland and Buffalo. It is a fairly poor town, and Ali Zaidi's family was poorer than most. But the area is heavily Republican, and he was a Republican. He does transform into a Democrat. Some excerpts from that:

If you had asked Ali, before he went to New Orleans, what he thought of people who didn’t help themselves, he would have said, “My parents had to start all over again. What’s the big deal? Just suck it up.” The sight of little kids post-Katrina jolted him. “It kind of blew my mind: if you are in kindergarten you should at least get a fair shot. It was just eye-opening: to see how much your geography could determine the opportunities available to you.”​

​

Now he sensed that poverty came in many flavors. He’d been lucky to have his particular parents and his particular community. He was reminded of the first time he’d run on a track with spikes. “You just fly on the track.” The poor kids he saw in New Orleans were trying to run the same race in life that he was. But he was wearing spikes and they weren’t. “There’s a real idealism that you have to indulge to think that people in New Orleans were now going to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. There were no bootstraps.”​

​

Then it gets into his time in the Department of Agriculture:

A small fraction of its massive annual budget ($164 billion in 2016) was actually spent on farmers, but it financed and managed all these programs in rural America—including the free school lunch for kids living near the poverty line. “I’m sitting there looking at this,” said Ali. “The U.S.D.A. had subsidized the apartment my family had lived in. The hospital we used. The fire department. The town’s water. The electricity. It had paid for the food I had eaten.”​

​

Trump really worked to slash the USDA. And the citizens of Edinboro largely voted for Trump as did rural people around the country. Yet without the USDA much of rural America would struggle to feed their kids (school lunch), pay for new homes (FHA loans), rent apartments (USDA-financed Rural Rental Housing or Farm Labor Housing projects), have police (USDA Rural Development Funding) , or fire protection (also USDA Rural Development).

Is it that people in places like Edinboro really don't want all that? Or are they just unaware of what the government really does? Let's remember, the lower-middle class aren't paying massive taxes. People taking advantage of reduced school lunch, getting FHA loans, or needing help to buy a fire truck largely are consuming more tax money than they pay.

Below is the article, it is the chapter in the book I just finished. It isn't nearly as frightening as the chapter on the Department of Energy. But a quick look revealed it online.

Inside Trump’s Cruel Campaign Against the U.S.D.A.’s Scientists

When Trump’s political appointees arrived at the U.S.D.A., career employees were shocked by their new bosses’ lack of qualifications. Michael Lewis explores why Americans need to care.

www.vanityfair.com

We’ve seen and heard this song and dance for decades. Too many people think the best way to solve problems is to spend money. This thread is no exception. The USDA spends a lot on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, yet obesity flourishes in among those in poverty. There are hundreds of example of how badly government provides needed services and how it duplicates those services. . The impulse to make the bad better by spending more and hiring more is irresponsible to policy makers.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

We’ve seen and heard this song and dance for decades. Too many people think the best way to solve problems is to spend money. This thread is no exception. The USDA spends a lot on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, yet obesity flourishes in among those in poverty. There are hundreds of example of how badly government provides needed services and how it duplicates those services. . The impulse to make the bad better by spending more and hiring more is irresponsible to policy makers.

I will await your proof that government programs are the cause of the obesity issue. I am going to give you a huge hint, I grew up on the "southern" diet. The government didn't create the concept all meats should be fried and all veggies drowned in butter. The government didn't invent biscuits and gravy (the best breakfast ever invented) nor sweet tea.

Study: 'Southern Diet' Strongly Linked To Heart Disease

People who eat a classically Southern diet are likely putting their hearts at risk.

www.forbes.com

It's hard to convince people to change diet habits that have been with them for a lifetime, and not all suggestions are useful. One health expert, in response to the study, suggested that "one might encourage Southern food eaters to opt for oven-fried nut-crusted chicken. Or New York-style collard greens simmered with extra virgin olive oil, tomatoes, garlic and organic vegetable stock." Perhaps the stroke belt's upper echelon can take this advice, but it seems unlikely that advice like this would be useful to someone whose income is less than $20,000/year, as were many of the participants in the study who were at the highest risk.​

​

Largely speaking, if the parents are eating the diets handed down to them, the kids are too.

But keep thinking the government is forcing it on people. Should the government food programs REQUIRE people buy only kale? Would you support that?

To add, the book mentions the average meal allowance is $1.46. To get food stamps people must work or attend job training at least 20 hours per week (children and some disabilities do not have to fulfill that requirement).

 

[Sope Creek]

To expand to more than what I originally covered.

Solyndra is covered. The program that loaned money to Solyndra handed out lots of loans. Lots of loans. The program MADE money, even accounting for Solyndra. Yet the program was judged a failure due to one loan, Solyndra.

The DOE started a program called ARPA-E. ARPA-E appeared on a Heritage Foundation list of programs that should be entirely cut. The administrators invited Heritage leaders to meet them for lunch then come to their offices so they could show them what they do. At the lunch, they gave some quick examples of their projects. The chief money person for Heritage asked "so you are like DARPA?" They replied yes, they are like DARPA. She said "I like DARPA". DARPA had invented the Kevlar vest, her son was saved in Iraq by his kevlar vest. After lunch, the Heritage people said they didn't need to go to the offices. ARPA-E was removed from the list they wanted defunded.

Now, that is good that they were willing to sit down and talk to ARPA-E and change their mind. Big kuddos to them. But it also shows ARPA-E had made the list only because Heritage had no clue what ARPA-E does. In a nutshell, that is the problem government faces. People hate government programs because they don't know what they do.

Regarding Solyndra, the takeaway I had from that segment was not only that the program made money, but that the program didn't take enough risks. Had it been a private investment fund, it would have taken a lot more, and a lot bigger, risks and would have made money. Only nobody in private investment would touch the investments that program was making because there wasn't a track record to base the investment decisions on . . . .

 

[bawlmer]

The impulse to make the bad better by spending more and hiring more is irresponsible to policy makers.

From what I can tell the response to obesity among people on SNAP was to try to understand if there was a causal link. That's not irresponsible. Seems to me the irresponsible impulse is to jump to the conclusion that SNAP should be defunded because some recipients are obese.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Since obesity came up, it was mentioned under Obama schools were required to up fruit and veggies, new standards for whole grains and fats, eliminated adding sweetness to milk. Sonny Purdue eliminated the rules.

So, who is battling childhood obesity?

 

[NPT]

Since obesity came up, it was mentioned under Obama schools were required to up fruit and veggies, new standards for whole grains and fats, eliminated adding sweetness to milk. Sonny Purdue eliminated the rules.

So, who is battling childhood obesity?

Obama's requirement probably did combat obesity because at least from what I heard around here the kids wouldn't eat most of the stuff they served so they just didn't eat.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Obama's requirement probably did combat obesity because at least from what I heard around here the kids wouldn't eat most of the stuff they served so they just didn't eat.

While that may be true, we then cannot complain about government's role in obesity and then oppose the government's attempt to combat obesity.

CO frequently comments on the obesity problem, clearly seeing it as a problem. At the same time he hated Obama's solution and posted frequently about how we had to have cupcakes in school classrooms. That line is so fine to walk an electron microscope can't see it.

If childhood obesity is a problem, serving sweetened milk with chicken fried steak and mashed potatoes with a cake is a problem. Griping at the government for trying to solve childhood obesity is like griping at the guy handing out pink lifeboats on the Titanic.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

From what I can tell the response to obesity among people on SNAP was to try to understand if there was a causal link. That's not irresponsible. Seems to me the irresponsible impulse is to jump to the conclusion that SNAP should be defunded because some recipients are obese.

I will await your proof that government programs are the cause of the obesity issue. I am going to give you a huge hint, I grew up on the "southern" diet. The government didn't create the concept all meats should be fried and all veggies drowned in butter. The government didn't invent biscuits and gravy (the best breakfast ever invented) nor sweet tea.

Study: 'Southern Diet' Strongly Linked To Heart Disease

People who eat a classically Southern diet are likely putting their hearts at risk.

www.forbes.com

It's hard to convince people to change diet habits that have been with them for a lifetime, and not all suggestions are useful. One health expert, in response to the study, suggested that "one might encourage Southern food eaters to opt for oven-fried nut-crusted chicken. Or New York-style collard greens simmered with extra virgin olive oil, tomatoes, garlic and organic vegetable stock." Perhaps the stroke belt's upper echelon can take this advice, but it seems unlikely that advice like this would be useful to someone whose income is less than $20,000/year, as were many of the participants in the study who were at the highest risk.​

​

Largely speaking, if the parents are eating the diets handed down to them, the kids are too.

But keep thinking the government is forcing it on people. Should the government food programs REQUIRE people buy only kale? Would you support that?

To add, the book mentions the average meal allowance is $1.46. To get food stamps people must work or attend job training at least 20 hours per week (children and some disabilities do not have to fulfill that requirement).

There is a reason why the sugar and soft drink industries spends billion on lobbyists. Candy, soft drinks, sugar coated cereal can all be purchased with food stamps. Supplements like vitamins, iron, and lutein are verboten.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

While that may be true, we then cannot complain about government's role in obesity and then oppose the government's attempt to combat obesity.

CO frequently comments on the obesity problem, clearly seeing it as a problem. At the same time he hated Obama's solution and posted frequently about how we had to have cupcakes in school classrooms. That line is so fine to walk an electron microscope can't see it.

If childhood obesity is a problem, serving sweetened milk with chicken fried steak and mashed potatoes with a cake is a problem. Griping at the government for trying to solve childhood obesity is like griping at the guy handing out pink lifeboats on the Titanic.

I really get tired of you misrepresenting what I said. I never advocated for cupcakes in school. I said if we are to ban cupcakes, that is a school or district decision. The Federal Departnpment of Education has much better things to do than regulate birthday parties.

 

[Sope Creek]

That line is so fine to walk an electron microscope can't see it.

That line is so good, I might have to steal it . . . .

 

[Marvin the Martian]

I really get tired of you misrepresenting what I said. I never advocated for cupcakes in school. I said if we are to ban cupcakes, that is a school or district decision. The Federal Departnpment of Education has much better things to do than regulate birthday parties.

And you are misrepresenting what the law did.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/08/04/michelle-obama-isnt-banning-bake-sales-birthday-cake/

And to make it clear, the Obama rules ONLY impacted items SOLD to kids, not given to them in a party:

Safe Cupcake Amendment Archives - The Lunch Tray

thelunchtray.com

 

[Marvin the Martian]

There is a reason why the sugar and soft drink industries spends billion on lobbyists. Candy, soft drinks, sugar coated cereal can all be purchased with food stamps. Supplements like vitamins, iron, and lutein are verboten.

Of course, that's a problem. Isn't the solution to limit campaign contributions as that solves this problem and most of the other problems people point out about big campaign contributions controlling policy? Why argue that big contributions negatively impact America AND we cannot limit big campaign contributions.

 

[IU_Hickory]

People vote against their financial interests because many place the social issues as more important. It also largely depends on where people go to get their news as well because everything in the media gets twisted in a way to make people like one party and find the other party dangerous. And now that people believe in their propaganda/conspiracies, politicians are getting rewarded with votes the more they espouse the propaganda/conspiracies.

 

[IUCrazy2]

i think that if we ever want meaningful change; and to provide more and different things, such as universal healthcare we need to revisit some party stereotypes and how we do things. the stereotypes with the dems center around needing to do more (3.5 trillion) and how are we going to get it: soak the rich. taxes. the stereotype for the pubs are that we need 57% or whatever it is of our discretionary spending to go to military. but do we? there's so much we do that needs revisiting and rarely do we hear about it from our entrenched reps. it's ideological changes and it's personnel changes imo

The military is a jobs program for many in this country. You can cut it but that will have an economic ripple effect.

 

[hoosboot]

While that may be true, we then cannot complain about government's role in obesity and then oppose the government's attempt to combat obesity.

CO frequently comments on the obesity problem, clearly seeing it as a problem. At the same time he hated Obama's solution and posted frequently about how we had to have cupcakes in school classrooms. That line is so fine to walk an electron microscope can't see it.

If childhood obesity is a problem, serving sweetened milk with chicken fried steak and mashed potatoes with a cake is a problem. Griping at the government for trying to solve childhood obesity is like griping at the guy handing out pink lifeboats on the Titanic.

Pink lifeboats? That's an example of government-run-amuck if I've ever seen one!