Is CNN right wing?So your entire news feed is strongly rightwing biased
Has anyone told them?
Is CNN right wing?So your entire news feed is strongly rightwing biased
I'm speaking of this moment in time. I believe it was those women who confronted him in the elevator that made him hold up the committee vote and work out a compromise, using his vote in the full senate as leverage to push for an FBI investigation. Or, more precisely, because that interaction on the elevator made the news is why he did what he did. He is not up for reelection so he had nothing to loose politically to do what he did. I have no illusions about our current state in politics and the discourse that have flowed from this disgrace.Until Flake demonstrates that his balls dont have to be squeezed befor an ounce of decency apears… hes still just anuther rotten at the core republican.!!!
Ok… lets say he had nuthin to lose politically… an yet he still woudnt do the right thang - well… until he was embarrassed in the news.!!!Or, more precisely, because that interaction on the elevator made the news is why he did what he did. He is not up for reelection so he had nothing to loose politically to do what he did.
Exactly! NOTHING!Remember they are making YOU pay for this sock pupet show AND they are paying themselves about 4 times as much as you get paid AND they are using YOUR money.
... and what products have they made ?
what services have they provided to traders to make the country money ?
Exactly! NOTHING!
Well, except roads. Almost every business in the US uses roads to transport goods. But other than that, NOTHING!
OK, maybe air traffic control. Air travel would be pretty horrific without ATC. And of course the FCC - regulation and allocation of spectrum allows things like high speed wireless data, GPS, emergency communications and TV. But other than roads, the ATC and the FCC . . .
Wait, maybe the military. If we were being invaded all the time by foreign powers it would be hard to build products. And the CDC - plagues would sure slow down production. And of course the space program; GPS, communications satellites and weather forecasts are pretty important for transport, communication and farming. And public sanitation, of course. And waterways - would be hard to have your factory in Los Angeles or Phoenix produce any products without water.
But outside of roads, ATC, the FCC, the military, the CDC, sanitation, the space program and waterways, they do NOTHING! Absolutely NOTHING! Why do we even have them?
How much of what is mentioned is a public good? The space program is certainly not non-rivalrous. A good chunk of government spending can be privatized which is enough to have a conversation about it — I don’t think many libertarians are against funding public goods as long as we can define what they are. (Some certainly are though, especially those “non-aggression principle” nutters)Exactly! NOTHING!
Well, except roads. Almost every business in the US uses roads to transport goods. But other than that, NOTHING!
OK, maybe air traffic control. Air travel would be pretty horrific without ATC. And of course the FCC - regulation and allocation of spectrum allows things like high speed wireless data, GPS, emergency communications and TV. But other than roads, the ATC and the FCC . . .
Wait, maybe the military. If we were being invaded all the time by foreign powers it would be hard to build products. And the CDC - plagues would sure slow down production. And of course the space program; GPS, communications satellites and weather forecasts are pretty important for transport, communication and farming. And public sanitation, of course. And waterways - would be hard to have your factory in Los Angeles or Phoenix produce any products without water.
But outside of roads, ATC, the FCC, the military, the CDC, sanitation, the space program and waterways, they do NOTHING! Absolutely NOTHING! Why do we even have them?
Rivalry is not the antonym of "public good."How much of what is mentioned is a public good? The space program is certainly not non-rivalrous.
Sure, that's another way to do it.A good chunk of government spending can be privatized which is enough to have a conversation about it
Which the private sector then charge you to useA good chunk of government spending can be privatized which is enough to have a conversation about it
To the contrary, the definition of a public good is "Non-rivalrous and non-excludable."Rivalry is not the antonym of "public good."
Sure, that's another way to do it.
I assume you're being sarcastic, but obviously it is imperative that roads remain non-excludable, because the funding of them cannot be regulated in a completely free market system. Some socialization like this is absolutely necessary because there is no real market incentive for things like road building and street lamps. If the argument was being made that air control, disease prevention, sanitation, and space programs etc. are non-rivalrous and non-excludable I'd have to disagree on some fundamental levels. I think that space programs are a particularly good example of that because to some degree, they already are marketable. SpaceX is, of course, the most obvious example of this.Which the private sector then charge you to use
Toll roads spring to mind
![]()
NooooooI assume you're being sarcastic,
And the direct services available from satellites.Space exploration benifits come from the usable science spin offs
Which is one of the science spin offsAnd the direct services available from satellites.
Brain fart![]()
i thought it was called a "Brain Fark" ?
surely they should make the final judicial member a millennial ?
i checked google and it has nothing on Fark, which i find a little dissapointing.MY brain fart I used to call thought. bubble
![]()
yesIs CNN right wing?
Has anyone told them?
Self-described Libertarians (meaning rightwing - the leftwing libertarians usually call themselves "liberals" or something complicated) have repeatedly and thoroughly and as a group demonstrated incompetence at "defining" what is in the common interest and the common good - beginning with the confused and essentially meaningless category of "public goods" that is their fixation.I don’t think many libertarians are against funding public goods as long as we can define what they are.
For starters, you could pick one that doesn't commit perjury, doesn't suck up to the likes of Donald Trump, hasn't spent most of their adult life (included rendered dubious legal opinions and apparently unethical services) as a Republican Party political flack and hit man, hasn't had major financial problems mysteriously disappear while serving as a Federal judge, doesn't attract multiple credible accusations of criminal sexual behavior, and doesn't look like Peter Pettigrew in rat mode when he gets all petulant and angry and whiny about his past bad behavior coming to light.Or one of the others who MAYBE able to relate to life?