Over / Under on Dems caving

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,563
6,140
113
You do realize that the gov’t is involved with Uber and Lyft too. I mean who regulates the flow of traffic and maintains the roads... Now take that and translate it over to air travel ...oh and btw, who is goign to police the skies?

Government couldn't operate Uber or Lyft if it was 100% subsidized! Who "polices" any commerce? Most markets are self regulating...meaning meeting existing consumer demand profitably. Safety issues can be handled by board certifications (like for air traffic controllers) but monitoring the demands of the traveling public is not only something Government can't do, it shouldn't do.
 

EERs 3:16

Redshirt
Oct 17, 2001
73,677
25
0
Cellular providers operate in highly regulated and restricted markets. If we allowed true free competition, many would not be around, or others would replace those who are currently offering lousy services.

In my area of Atlanta, I have only two service providers for my internet. Both are lousy, and better companies offering superior products at lower costs aren't even allowed to compete in my particular area. Pisses me off.

I'm for Government doing those things it's Constitutionally mandated to do. The rest of it can be and should be done in the private sector.

So I don’t get it. FIrst you praise competition then you come back to say, that free competition would limit the number of companies that can compete in the market place, which reduces competition and brings us closer to.a monopoly. How do monopolies help out the consumer?
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,230
3,298
113
The government doesn’t pay for the education of doctors, attorneys, engineers, scientists, etc. ********, you’re a moron.
In many cases they absolutely do. If not directly, which many of the doctors will do a military hitch for it, same for attorneys, then indirectly through debt forgiveness on college loans.

Engineers are a different story, there isn’t a major difference between what private sector is paying vs what Govt does for them, and where salary disparity exists, benefits packages on the Govt side offset the direct salary. Scientists on the other hand often work via grants at Universities like MIT, DARPA, Hopkins, and a variety of others. Again, salary disparities for like fields aren’t that different and again, benefits packages. Then you have the fringe stuff for developing patents etc.

Just stop.
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,563
6,140
113
So I don’t get it. FIrst you praise competition then you come back to say, that free competition would limit the number of companies that can compete in the market place, which reduces competition and brings us closer to.a monopoly. How do monopolies help out the consumer?

I argue no such thing. I'm saying the more competition, the better services you receive. I sell Fords, but I'm certainly glad we have competition from GM, Chrysler, Toyota and Nissan. It forces us to stay on our toes, and offer products to our customers which they hopefully prefer over those other companies.

Quote me where I said I favor less competition or more government controls?
 
Last edited:

EERs 3:16

Redshirt
Oct 17, 2001
73,677
25
0
Government couldn't operate Uber or Lyft if it was 100% subsidized! Who "polices" any commerce? Most markets are self regulating...meaning meeting existing consumer demand profitably. Safety issues can be handled by board certifications (like for air traffic controllers) but monitoring the demands of the traveling public is not only something Government can't do, it shouldn't do.
Wait what? Which markets are self regulating..... Who si goign to manage the saftey boards and who will set the standards? You going to rely on industry to do that for you? If so, we all know how that’s going to end. The gov’t has always managed and monitored public travel - even int he good ole days of steam travel, the gov’t had an overnight role.
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,230
3,298
113
Wait what? Which markets are self regulating..... Who si goign to manage the saftey boards and who will set the standards? You going to rely on industry to do that for you? If so, we all know how that’s going to end. The gov’t has always managed and monitored public travel - even int he good ole days of steam travel, the gov’t had an overnight role.
Absolutely not. There are areas where Govt is needed. You’re trying to make this into an argument of absolutes as pretending he or I are arguing for absolutism with respect to capitalism. We’ve shown it alone will corrupt. Socialism and Communism has shown the same in the other direction. There is a balance. We’re currently tilted in my opinion in the wrong direction with too much Govt.
 

EERs 3:16

Redshirt
Oct 17, 2001
73,677
25
0
I argue no such thing. I'm saying the more competition, the better services you receive. I sell Fords, but I'm certainly glad we competition from GM, Chrysler, Toyota and Nissan. It forces us to stay on our toes, and offer products to our customers which they hopefully prefer over those other companies.

Quote me where I said I favor less competition or more government controls?
First of all, I never said you favored less competition....you’re not being anywhere close to being accurate. Go back and re-read what I posted. Additionally you said this “ If we allowed true free competition, many would not be around”. So that statement alone means you acknowledge that an unregulated market place would lead to reduced competition....
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,563
6,140
113
Wait what? Which markets are self regulating..... Who si goign to manage the saftey boards and who will set the standards? You going to rely on industry to do that for you? If so, we all know how that’s going to end. The gov’t has always managed and monitored public travel - even int he good ole days of steam travel, the gov’t had an overnight role.

My friend, millions of Americans get into their private transportation vehicles everyday and go about their daily lives moving to where they need to go without filing flight plans or asking for permission from the Government.

The mechanic who worked on your car wasn't certified by the government. Nor was the plumber who fixed your leaky pipes, or the roofer who fixed your leaky roof. Do we want incompetent ill trained people running our air traffic system? No! Do we need the government to make sure those folks know what they're doing? No!

Government needs a road or a bridge built. They hire road graders and bridge builders. They do just fine and problems come when Government bureaucrats get in the way.
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,230
3,298
113
First of all, I never said you favored less competition....you’re not being anywhere close to being accurate. Go back and re-read what I posted. Additionally you said this “ If we allowed true free competition, many would not be around”. So that statement alone means you acknowledge that an unregulated market place would lead to reduced competition....
You are correct, it would, however, part of what plays into that is favorable legislation that benefits the larger corporations on the backs of their lobbying arms working with Politicians. It’s kind of why we all, Corporations have PACs that we contribute into as employees.
 

EERs 3:16

Redshirt
Oct 17, 2001
73,677
25
0
Absolutely not. There are areas where Govt is needed. You’re trying to make this into an argument of absolutes as pretending he or I are arguing for absolutism with respect to capitalism. We’ve shown it alone will corrupt. Socialism and Communism has shown the same in the other direction. There is a balance. We’re currently tilted in my opinion in the wrong direction with too much Govt.
Is there too much gov’t in our lives...yeah sure....freely admit that. However, there are programs that the gov’t and only the gov’t can administer and one has to apply some logic and critical thinking to the problem...because tossing logic and common sense out the window to support an ideology is unacceptable
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,563
6,140
113
First of all, I never said you favored less competition....you’re not being anywhere close to being accurate. Go back and re-read what I posted. Additionally you said this “ If we allowed true free competition, many would not be around”. So that statement alone means you acknowledge that an unregulated market place would lead to reduced competition....

Yes of course. By self regulating...I mean consumers...customers determine who survives and who doesn't based on the quality of the services they receive from providers.

I'm all in favor of inefficient lousy service or product providers losing market share. That's the way it's supposed to work. Not government subsidizing lousy services or inefficient providers. We're talking past each other.

My essential argument is air traffic control can be done without the government running it. Better I'm arguing. If you differ from that OK...but you haven't convinced me government does it better and no one else can.
 

EERs 3:16

Redshirt
Oct 17, 2001
73,677
25
0
My friend, millions of Americans get into their private transportation vehicles everyday and go about their daily lives moving to where they need to go without filing flight plans or asking for permission from the Government.

The mechanic who worked on your car wasn't certified by the government. Nor was the plumber who fixed your leaky pipes, or the roofer who fixed your leaky roof. Do we want incompetent ill trained people running our air traffic system? No! Do we need the government to make sure those folks know what they're doing? No!

Government needs a road or a bridge built. They hire road graders and bridge builders. They do just fine and problems come when Government bureaucrats get in the way.
Millions of people who are licensed by their gov’t get into cars and go about their business.......you left out a critical component of your statement..oh and that licensing is managed by _________________________ (you fill in the blank)

So who sets the standards that the air traffic controllers operate under? Who ensures that the air traffic controllers are properly trained and are up to standards? Who manages the infrastructure that allows the aircraft to fly (radar...beacon points...&c)?

When the bridge is being built, who makes sure its’ up to code? Manages the contracts? Gets funding for it....?
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,230
3,298
113
Is there too much gov’t in our lives...yeah sure....freely admit that. However, there are programs that the gov’t and only the gov’t can administer and one has to apply some logic and critical thinking to the problem...because tossing logic and common sense out the window to support an ideology is unacceptable
I don’t disagree. To the original example of ATC though, those individuals could easily be privatized.

Your TSA analogy was faulty, but it doesn’t really matter. The overarching regulatory body shouldn’t be, but the folks doing it could and should be.
 

EERs 3:16

Redshirt
Oct 17, 2001
73,677
25
0
Yes of course. By self regulating...I mean consumers...customers determine who survives and who doesn't based on the quality of the services they receive from providers.

I'm all in favor of inefficient lousy service or product providers losing market share. That's the way it's supposed to work. Not government subsidizing lousy services or inefficient providers. We're talking past each other.

My essential argument is air traffic control can be done without the government running it. Better I'm arguing. If you differ from that OK...but you haven't convinced me government does it better and no one else can.
And who pays for these air traffic controllers? Do the airlines do that or someone else?

My essential argument is you’re going off on a topic that you haven’t fully investigated and don’t fully understand and appreciate the level of complexity that’s involved in air traffic control.
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
And who pays for these air traffic controllers? Do the airlines do that or someone else?

My essential argument is you’re going off on a topic that you haven’t fully investigated and don’t fully understand and appreciate the level of complexity that’s involved in air traffic control.

He’s an expert. He said so himself.
 

EERs 3:16

Redshirt
Oct 17, 2001
73,677
25
0
I don’t disagree. To the original example of ATC though, those individuals could easily be privatized.

Your TSA analogy was faulty, but it doesn’t really matter. The overarching regulatory body shouldn’t be, but the folks doing it could and should be.
The same people that are doing it now, are the same ones that would be acting as screeners after it was re-privatized....so I don’t see how things would change. Also, I see great benefits to federal agencies exchanging information and preventing the bad guys from getting on aeroplanes
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,563
6,140
113
FIrst you praise competition then you come back to say, that free competition would limit the number of companies that can compete in the market place,

It would...free competition would eliminate those product and service providers who offer lousy products and services. As it should.

How do monopolies help out the consumer?

They don't! Government often protects or promotes them though. In transportation, communications, energy, banking, education, and a variety of other well funded and lobbied services. Where competition is limited, service offerings tend to be lousy.

Who is Amtrak's competition offering high speed rail transportation for customers who prefer to go by train? Amtrak has no real competition and their lousy service shows it. Government in many ways is a monopoly...in primary education for instance. Where it faces viable competition, usually it offers an inferior service.
 
Last edited:

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,563
6,140
113
And who pays for these air traffic controllers? Do the airlines do that or someone else?

My essential argument is you’re going off on a topic that you haven’t fully investigated and don’t fully understand and appreciate the level of complexity that’s involved in air traffic control.

I'm arguing a principle over the specifics. Who pays for home design and construction? Who pays for clothing designs and distribution? Who pays for musical instrument creation and sales? I don't see Government as the all encompassing permission service you do. We simply disagree over its role and scope.
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,230
3,298
113
And who pays for these air traffic controllers? Do the airlines do that or someone else?

My essential argument is you’re going off on a topic that you haven’t fully investigated and don’t fully understand and appreciate the level of complexity that’s involved in air traffic control.
It would likely be done through an Open Sourced solicitation the same as all Govt contracting for service contracts. In the end, you have Govt involvement just to a much much lesser degree. That’s funded through the budget and ultimately we the tax payer pay for it.

The alternative would be the airlines themselves pay for it based on usage and the costs would be passed to the consumer on their tickets. It’s just a matter of where the money goes. I personally would rather it go to private industry than Govt.

I mean, we have airlines, publicly traded, with shareholders. In other nations, the airline is a Govt run entity. If we can do it with airlines, we damn sure can do it with ATC and TSA.
 
Last edited:

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,230
3,298
113
The same people that are doing it now, are the same ones that would be acting as screeners after it was re-privatized....so I don’t see how things would change. Also, I see great benefits to federal agencies exchanging information and preventing the bad guys from getting on aeroplanes
We already share a lot of information from the private side to Govt. This example is in play across a lot of different areas.

And no, it wouldn’t be the same people, not necessarily. Right now, you have individuals protected by Govt employment laws that otherwise wouldn’t be in the Private sector. There are positives and negatives to both. A major negative is it’s very difficult to cut dead weight and the carrying of an inflated work force driving excess cost.
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,563
6,140
113
Millions of people who are licensed by their gov’t get into cars and go about their business.......you left out a critical component of your statement..oh and that licensing is managed by _________________________ (you fill in the blank)

So who sets the standards that the air traffic controllers operate under? Who ensures that the air traffic controllers are properly trained and are up to standards? Who manages the infrastructure that allows the aircraft to fly (radar...beacon points...&c)?

When the bridge is being built, who makes sure its’ up to code? Manages the contracts? Gets funding for it....?

Do you know who Underwriter's Laboratory is? What they do? Are they run by the government? I'd argue they are responsible for 95% of the safety in today's electrical gadgets.


If only the government can certify our professional service providers, who certifies the government certifiers?

Don't tell me...more government bureaucrats right?
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,230
3,298
113
LOL. If this doesn't prove to everyone that you are a complete imbecile, I don't know what will.
It’s almost like the entire reason Govt employs the private sector is because the private sector does it more efficiently and effectively. And this fvcking thing votes. Shewwww
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
It’s almost like the entire reason Govt employs the private sector is because the private sector does it more efficiently and effectively. And this fvcking thing votes. Shewwww

One of the main reasons federal agencies hire private sector is because private sector has lobbyists that lobby Congress and then Congress tells federal agencies they will contract out x percentage.

F’ucking moron. I’ve not seen too many people in my life who are so ignorant, they actually think they know what they are talking about and think they can make others actually think they are experts and knowledgeable about what they are talking about while others are laughing at their stupid ***.

Go to college, dumbass.
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,563
6,140
113
If Government is so great at managing things (ie a 3 trillion dollar budget) why are we running a 21 trillion dollar debt? Was that 3 Tril not enough money every year to cover legitimate expenses?

 
Last edited:

TarHeelEer

Freshman
Dec 15, 2002
89,304
53
48
One of the main reasons federal agencies hire private sector is because private sector has lobbyists that lobby Congress and then Congress tells federal agencies they will contract out x percentage.



F’ucking moron. I’ve not seen too many people in my life who are so ignorant, they actually think they know what they are talking about and think they can make others actually think they are experts and knowledgeable about what they are talking about while others are laughing at their stupid ***.

Go to college, dumbass.

 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,230
3,298
113
One of the main reasons federal agencies hire private sector is because private sector has lobbyists that lobby Congress and then Congress tells federal agencies they will contract out x percentage.

F’ucking moron. I’ve not seen too many people in my life who are so ignorant, they actually think they know what they are talking about and think they can make others actually think they are experts and knowledgeable about what they are talking about while others are laughing at their stupid ***.

Go to college, dumbass.
Hahahahhaa
 

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,230
3,298
113
Yes they do. Roommate of mine... retires JAG.... Law school paid for by..... the government.
ROTC programs in college? Paid.

Med School/Dental School/Nursing etc.? Paid

My nannies best friend just finished law school. Got accepted to JAG...loans paid off.

The fvcking guy is an argument against Govt employees personified.
 

Mntneer

Sophomore
Oct 7, 2001
10,192
196
0
LOL at anyone who thinks private sector could perform the same function as the government more economically.

First of all, look at any profession - attorneys, doctors, engineers, scientists, etc. The salary in government is less than private sector. Secondly, private sector is working to maximize profits.

Why is it then there are so many companies out there that contract work to the government, if the government could do it so much better?
 

WVU82_rivals

Senior
May 29, 2001
199,091
693
0
The dems don't care about anything but power...

votes get them power...

they'll help their voters...

they don't care about Americans...

or the wall would be built.
 

atlkvb

All-American
Jul 9, 2004
82,563
6,140
113
You maximize profits by paying a higher salary? This is why you’re a joke.

I missed this earlier in the thread! But just think about the advanced levels of economic ignorance it took for that particular poster to hold that thought, then actually transcribe it from their keyboard and onto this message board?o_O


The salary in government is less than private sector. Secondly, private sector is working to maximize profits.

...So unless they're not operating for profits, the private sector is always doomed to inferior results vs the Government? So we need the private sector to be less profit driven in order to compete more efficiently with government workers?:confused: