View All

3 Comments

  1. well i said something back, if he gets annoyed i told him to blame you 😛

  2. I agree…

    Nicely said… While I do not agree with every specific point.. I do find what he said to be an extraordinarily well-thought out position with regard to systemic governmental structures…

    although I would probably fit into the category of leftist statist by his standards.. a group, in whose membership, I don’t really have a problem being in.. I will also state that I certainly don’t believe that ultimate centralization is the goal of any true “liberal”.. I’ve lived in Germany–and I got to see what France was like and there centralization was so insanely extreme that it was helping to destroy certain parts of those societies…

    basically.. I’m only for a strong state in those areas where markets and other more “free” systems of governance appear to fail–or are vastly less productive or efficient…
    An example would be the pro-rationing system for oil production. Initially, when people found oil, the rule of the land was the “law of capture,” which meant that whoever could pump the oil out first got it…

    The problem with this system was that it is entirely inefficient on a couple of different levels..
    1. It leads to unstable economic situations–it inherently creates quick gluts and then shortages which play havoc with businesses and overall economic life…
    2. More importantly, it vastly reduces the amount of oil that you can get out of a particular pool. Due to physical laws of nature, there are generally “maximum drainage rates” for oil wells that will keep the pressure high enough in an oil pool for the longest period of time so that you can get the maximum amount of the “oil in place” out of the deposit..

    In the 1930’s, Texas’s railroad commission instituted a pro-rationing system across the state in order to prevent incredible amounts of waste–however, they did need the federal government’s help to try and get the other states in line.. and they did this despite the many attacks made on them by people claiming that they were being socialist and disregarding “freedom and free markets” etc etc..

    It is in cases like this that I think a stronger state is useful, but… something that should also be obvious is that I totally support state rights and, this is where I really agree with , I think that the states have gotten royally fucked by the feds in recent years.. Nixon was especially bad here when he basiclaly stopped returning tax receipts to them yet still kept imposing federal mandates on them that cost tons of money..

    In any case.. I think this is where we need to find common ground.. While I think that the feds truly fucked up here with Katrina (mainly in not sending extra forces to keep order and help evacuate when it became obvious that the lower levels of gov’t couldn’t accomplish this task) .. I also believe that the local levels of gov’t should be held accountable for their incredible lack of planning… e.g. The Mayor of New Orlean’s “plan” for this catastrophe was to move people to higher ground and wait for the state and feds to save them..

    That is not a real catastrophe plan!!!

    anyway.. I gotta get moving..

  3. In congress, they call that approximate set of viewpoints “Constitutionalism.” I am pretty sure Bartlett’s aid told me there were less than a dozen of them left in the House, and people sort of regard them as “old guard” and see them as a dying breed. Bartlett is one, FTR, but he’s only running for one more term. (Unfortunately, now that I live in Baltimore county, he’s not my congressman anymore anyway. I should find out who is and go visit their office.)

Comments are closed.