WNY as a microcosm of the future?

[finknottle]

NYS government is a joke, and anyone who thinks it can save anything... well... i have a bridge to sell you in Kansas.

 

Great - we can write it off as infrastructure spending in the stimulus bill!

[blzrul]

Except government is being run EXACTLY like a large business. It's just too bad that so many of you can't see it. Quick, whine about tax payer money being spent to prop up corporations while your masters are awarding TRILLIONS of dollars we don't have to people who helped them get elected.

And the **** state of Alaska, where no-one lives, got the MOST per capita of any state.

 

But, you gave "yours" back, right?

 

Uh huh.

[OCinBuffalo]

It got us through WWI and won WWII (blue).

Yikes! How Orewellian I thought the Iraq war hurt the economy.... Are you saying it helped it?

Let's face facts: WWII was the single greatest thing that helped the economy, not anything FDR did. He was much better at the war than at the economy.

No. All I am saying is that you don't hurt the patriots that got you through the war by "eating your own." BFLO was a very unique situation during (especially WWII)... How the rest of the country and corporations turned it's back...

Buffalo was simply not "sustainable" under FDR/LBJ(and Jimmy Hoffa) policies. It was while we had the giant head start after WWII, but that went to crap as soon as Japan and Europe cleaned up their mess and started producing again globally in the 1970's.

 

Lesson to learn: Idiots demand that a guy who drives a truck, or works in a factory, be paid the same and receive the same benefits, as a guy who skills are in much higher demand, just because they said so, with no economic or financial basis for that statement. Idiots pretend that one guy driving a truck is exactly as good as the next guy driving a truck, should be paid the exact same, and automagically gets better at it every 5 years, and therefore deserves more. Sooner or later the market comes in and makes an ass out of you = Jimmy Carter...and Clinton in his first 2 years, until he wised up.

 

The history is clear:

Carter = done, and beaten badly

Clinton 92-4 = put nonsensical socialist ideology ahead of common sense and paid dearly for it

Clinton 94-00 = did what works(hint: not socialism), gained success with it, and stayed in power

 

I wonder if Obama will learn from Clinton in time to turn this around and get re-elected? Odds are he will...he's smart and he's not falling on the Mondale sword for anybody...which means you can forget socialist health care, environtology, and any other "change" policy where believing in large amounts of BS is key. I will howl laughing at the far-left either way, because Obama will either get tossed out of office, or he will ignore them. They still don't get their way, even from their own guy...but I'm sure it will be somebody else's fault as usual.

BFLO broke BOTH GEOGRAPHICALLY and socially.

Root cause:

1. so many people clinging to a broken ideology that pretends that other countries in the world don't exist economically or militarily

2. people clinging to paying people whatever they decide is a "living wage" instead of what the market will bear

3. ???

4. "Yes we can!"

Where was the outcry from the rest of the nation in 1959 when they were piece-mealing BFLO out bit by bit.

Exactly nowhere, the other states/people are looking out for their own interests, which is what they are supposed to be doing.

And if the US exludes them and throws up protectionist measures?

Then you will see a repeat of the Taft-Hartley act and it's consequences. It's helpful to actually know history and economics before you set out to "solve" problems.

The problem here in WNY isn't government's involvement so much, it is how much WE spend on doing the same thing governments do everywhere else at lower costs. It's a specious arguement GG.

BS Flag. Pretending that the quality of care in Canada is the same as it his here is specious argument as well.

 

If you buy the lesser product, by definition, you expect it to be cheaper.

 

Replacing insurance company bureaucracy with government employee bureaucracy that eventually costs more and that you cannot fire for incompetence without 5 times the hassle and cost, is not a solution. It's just moving the problem from one place to another. It's just creating more people who owe you their vote because you got them their jobs. But of course Democrats wouldn't dream of doing that now would they, they aren't the party of corruption!(cough, Chicago, cough, Cleveland, cough, Buffalo)Right.

 

Now if we all accept that we are going to have to wait in line, or be denied outright, for medical services, and proceed on that lowered expectation, then sure, government MIGHT be able to do it cheaper. But then again, there's the Post Office vs. Fed Ex thing, and there's nothing specious about that argument now is there?

Why do we as a nation need China and other emeriging nations if said emerging nations don't want to play by a higher standard? Our market and the European markets are big enough to sustain their needs.

What are you going to do, go to the UN and tell them to only allow China to sell here and in Europe? What is the % chance that the UN will enforce said trade regulations, or that China will obey them?

It is true that the size of government weighs heavily on the economy here, and needs to be slashed. But those who argue that government is always inefficient ignore how poorly private management is and can be as well. ........ As long as we remain divided, both sides (Dems and Reps) continue to do the same !@#$ing thing...

This is all right by me, because it's predicated on the truth and common sense first, compassion when we can afford it, and not ideology. The real problem IS ideology. If you believe that government, by definition, SHOULD grow larger/smaller in all cases, and is the answer to all/no problems, then you aren't solving problems, you are creating them. Each situation requires common sense, period.

 

However, larger opportunity for corruption INEVITABLY follows larger government. Also, when you remove the consequences of competition, and replace them with the expectations of entitlement, you drive down efficiency and most importantly, effectiveness.

 

I don't like the phrase "run government like a business" either, because all too often the people who use that phrase don't know the first thing about running a business, on any level. It simply sounds good. The greatest weakness of large organizations in inflexibility. Driving decisions based on ideology, and not sound methodology, is the very definition of inflexibility. Methodology seeks improvement. Ideology pretends to be infallible.

 

I don't want a health department social worker to be more efficient, because I'm not sure how you do that = tell people they have AIDS by phone/email? But I do want them to be effective, and to REQUIRE efficacy from their peers and employees. Which means we only need to hire 5 good people, instead of 3 good guys and then force them to take 4 mediocre guys and 3 losers that we had to find a job for because they voted for the "team", and now the "teem" needs to pay off.

[GG]

It is true that the size of government weighs heavily on the economy here, and needs to be slashed. But those who argue that government is always inefficient ignore how poorly private management is and can be as well. Should we bring in management from Chrysler, GM, Lehman, Bear Stearns, AIG, Merrill, WaMu, UBS, and on and on and on....to run government "efficiently"?

 

Is your point that government is run like the worst of corporations? Then, we can agree.

 

Never mind that efficiency usually refers to managing the cost side of an organization, and there again you can parallel big government to the big three. But at least the private sector has an effective mechanism to cleanse out bloated inefficiency, no matter the pain.

[finknottle]

Can anyone give any examples where large government programs have been eliminated for failure or obsolesence, or where workforces were rooted out for incompetance?

 

What is the correcting mechanism? Or is the answer that governments are immune to the problems of poor employees or poorly thought-out programs?

[UBinVA]

This blog is another take on the problems of WNY that I posted a few months ago.

 

 

The Stimulus will lead America in the direction of Western New York

If you want to know what President Obama's new style of government-led, Democratic Party economic and political policies will bring to the country, you need look no further than Western New York --

 

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/the...ad_america.html

[Typical TBD Guy]

Can anyone give any examples where large government programs have been eliminated for failure or obsolesence, or where workforces were rooted out for incompetance?

 

What is the correcting mechanism? Or is the answer that governments are immune to the problems of poor employees or poorly thought-out programs?

 

Only the educated voter . Governments are not-for-profit organizations with no incentive to deliver quality, efficient service because they have a virtually endless supply of "willing" outside funding sources (the taxpayers). Unless the ExiledInIllinois/blzrul/conner/molson!@#$face/GeneFreckle/BishopGivesHead idiots wake up, government will only further entwine itself with red tape.

[Chef Jim]

Can anyone give any examples where large government programs have been eliminated for failure or obsolesence, or where workforces were rooted out for incompetance?

 

What is the correcting mechanism? Or is the answer that governments are immune to the problems of poor employees or poorly thought-out programs?

 

In 2004 in CA we had this wonderful idea of creating a proposition to require the state government to balance the budget where expenses would not exceed revenues. It was passed by a large amount 71%. It worked so well that we are voting on prop 1A in a couple of weeks that will balance the budget and create a rainy day fund.

 

What a bunch of dipshiits

 

From the Governator in 2004:

 

"Never again can our state spend more money than it takes in," Schwarzenegger said. "And never again will our state be driven to the brink of bankruptcy. Never again."

 

The Governator in 2009:

 

"Never again do we want to find ourselves wandering around in another $42 billion Valley of Doom," the governor told an audience at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco in March, weeks after he signed a budget that erased a record deficit. "A 'yes' vote (on Proposition 1A) puts our great state back on the path to prosperity."

 

[IDBillzFan]

In CA we had this wonderful idea of creating a proposition to require the state government to balance the budget where expenses would not exceed revenues. It was passed by a large amount 71%. It worked so well that we are voting on prop 1A in a couple of weeks that will balance the budget and create a rainy day fund.

 

What a bunch of dipshiits

 

From the Governator in 2004:

 

The Governator in 2009:

 

I honestly hope we vote every one of those idiotic propositions down, except maybe 1F, which essentially says elected officials are not permitted to give themselves a raise while the state is running a deficit. Of course it doesn't say anything about them not being able to retro-actively give themselves a raise when the state isn't running a deficit.

 

I love Prop 1B. Education Funding, Payment Plan: Requires supplemental payments to local school districts and community colleges to address recent budget cuts. Fiscal impact: Potential state savings of up to several billion dollars in 2009-10 and 2010-11. Potential state costs of billions of dollars annually thereafter. WTF????

 

How about Prop 1C: Let's borrow $5 billion in future lottery profits to balance the budget.

 

!@#$ing idiotic liberals. And yes, that means you, too, Arnold, you lying sack of liberal shhiit.

[TPS]

Is your point that government is run like the worst of corporations? Then, we can agree.

 

Never mind that efficiency usually refers to managing the cost side of an organization, and there again you can parallel big government to the big three. But at least the private sector has an effective mechanism to cleanse out bloated inefficiency, no matter the pain.

No, my point was that your comparison between WNY and Obamaconomics is BS.

 

And I am sure in early 2007 you would've argued that all of those corps I listed were doing well and were efficiently managed. They were also reaping the benefits of good 'ol supply-side economics...

[KD in CA]

No, my point was that your comparison between WNY and Obamaconomics is BS.

 

And I am sure in early 2007 you would've argued that all of those corps I listed were doing well and were efficiently managed. They were also reaping the benefits of good 'ol supply-side economics...

 

But you conveniently ignore the tens of thousands of successful, well-run companies that employ hundreds of millions of people whose productivity funds all the government spending/waste and the salaries of tens of millions of gov't employees.

 

It's simply not possible that anyone (who is sane so that excludes you EEI) really believes that government can run anywhere near as well as private entities. It's a result of human nature: since there is no check and balance against government abuse it will run amok and corruption will flourish and become institutionalized. In the real world, someone's money is at stake that is what keeps private business in check. The ones that abuse that eventually get rooted out by the checks in the system.

 

You've yet to provide any evidence that Obamanomics isn't WNY on a grand scale. Big government spending, high taxes, companies forced to swallow unaffordable union exortion at the point of the gov't sword, etc.

[GG]

No, my point was that your comparison between WNY and Obamaconomics is BS.

 

And I am sure in early 2007 you would've argued that all of those corps I listed were doing well and were efficiently managed. They were also reaping the benefits of good 'ol supply-side economics...

 

I don't think that the comparison is BS at all. Obama may not have the intention to run all the businesses that are being taken over, but things like that have natural parasite mechanisms and it won't be easy to shed government control even when it's not needed.

 

But let's stay with your examples, yes most of those companies were well managed in 2007. 2008 was a different case. You also know that a financial firm can disappear overnight, no matter how well it's been managed if its customers don't believe it's managed well. Which pretty much happened to most of the financials you mention.

 

But let's look at GM & Chrysler. They are run very closely to government. It was plainly obvious that the companies' cost structure could not contain the eroding market share. Yet everyone involved was perfectly happy to kick the can down the road so that it would be someone else's problem. Sound familiar?

 

The private markets' excesses are fully documented, and pain is felt everywhere from 50% drops in asset values to double-digit unemployment. Yet, we're supposed to believe that the world will stop if governments won't get their standard 5%-10% budget increases, because that's what they got used to during the hey days that you say didn't count.

[TPS]

I don't think that the comparison is BS at all. Obama may not have the intention to run all the businesses that are being taken over, but things like that have natural parasite mechanisms and it won't be easy to shed government control even when it's not needed.

 

But let's stay with your examples, yes most of those companies were well managed in 2007. 2008 was a different case. You also know that a financial firm can disappear overnight, no matter how well it's been managed if its customers don't believe it's managed well. Which pretty much happened to most of the financials you mention.

 

But let's look at GM & Chrysler. They are run very closely to government. It was plainly obvious that the companies' cost structure could not contain the eroding market share. Yet everyone involved was perfectly happy to kick the can down the road so that it would be someone else's problem. Sound familiar?

 

The private markets' excesses are fully documented, and pain is felt everywhere from 50% drops in asset values to double-digit unemployment. Yet, we're supposed to believe that the world will stop if governments won't get their standard 5%-10% budget increases, because that's what they got used to during the hey days that you say didn't count.

Wrong way Corrigan.

I didn't know that Erie County took over businesses?

WNY is an example of a bloated, inefficient government, not of the FDR/Obama type. You are trying to make the case that Obama's policies will lead to a sort of WNY malaise, when there is no equivalent example.

[GG]

You are trying to make the case that Obama's policies will lead to a sort of WNY malaise, when there is no equivalent example.

 

Continental Europe immediately comes to mind.

[Bishop Hedd]

Ah Gaughn baby Gaughn...*sigh*

 

Ya know this guy's been around for awhile...local media darling of outlets as disperate as hate radio 930 wben to local softy sappy boob Bflo News columnist Donn Esmonde...running for a major position in WNY politics and always losing...trying to dismantle suburban heirarchy to same results..fine. But people hear have heard Gaughn (Christ have we!) and people like him and realize our problems go well beyond expanded government.

 

 

I have yet to hear any mention of the disease known as suburban sprawl which has polluted city cores and regions, from rust belt to sunbelt for decades now.

 

 

But oh that's right...developers never do anything wrong.

[Wacka]

I honestly hope we vote every one of those idiotic propositions down, except maybe 1F, which essentially says elected officials are not permitted to give themselves a raise while the state is running a deficit. Of course it doesn't say anything about them not being able to retro-actively give themselves a raise when the state isn't running a deficit.

 

I love Prop 1B. Education Funding, Payment Plan: Requires supplemental payments to local school districts and community colleges to address recent budget cuts. Fiscal impact: Potential state savings of up to several billion dollars in 2009-10 and 2010-11. Potential state costs of billions of dollars annually thereafter. WTF????

 

How about Prop 1C: Let's borrow $5 billion in future lottery profits to balance the budget.

 

!@#$ing idiotic liberals. And yes, that means you, too, Arnold, you lying sack of liberal shhiit.

 

I already mailed in my ballot. No on 1A-1E Yes on 1F.

I also vote now on all bond issues. People forget we have to pay the interest.

[GG]

I have yet to hear any mention of the disease known as suburban sprawl which has polluted city cores and regions, from rust belt to sunbelt for decades now.

 

 

But oh that's right...developers never do anything wrong.

 

Yes, suburban sprawl is definitely among the problems facing WNY. It takes a whole 17 minutes to get from anywhere in WNY to somewhere in WNY during rush hour.

 

When you could have bought a house in Buffalo during the height of the real estate boom for less than a used Honda Accord, then developers are not the problem.

[GG]

Wrong way Corrigan.

I didn't know that Erie County took over businesses?

WNY is an example of a bloated, inefficient government, not of the FDR/Obama type. You are trying to make the case that Obama's policies will lead to a sort of WNY malaise, when there is no equivalent example.

 

Or if not other countries, why shouldn't state governments be a guide to the future?

 

Do I know how to pick places to live, or what?

[finknottle]

I have yet to hear any mention of the disease known as suburban sprawl which has polluted city cores and regions, from rust belt to sunbelt for decades now.

 

 

But oh that's right...developers never do anything wrong.

 

As distastefull as surburban sprawl may be asthetically, I have yet to hear how it is the cause of any economic ills. Tax revenue that used to go to the big cities now goes to the counties - the taxpayers are voting with their feet. Would you deny them that right?

 

Assigning blame for our economic woes to cul-de-sacs and their inhabitants seems positively Obama-esque.

[Chef Jim]

I already mailed in my ballot. No on 1A-1E Yes on 1F.

I also vote now on all bond issues. People forget we have to pay the interest.

 

It's not so much the interest, the principal needs to be paid back too at maturity. That's a huge payback.