2007-08-08 04:52:41 · 10 answers · asked by civil_av8r 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
What do you mean?
The government can fix bridges......it just costs around 5 times as much and takes 3 times as long compared to a private company.
2007-08-08 05:00:24 · answer #1 · answered by Time to Shrug, Atlas 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The government can fix a bridge...and they will fix it. Infrastructure is one of governments responsibilities...because individual citizens of Minnesota can't stop their daily lives to go repair a bridge for themselves. Government sucks with finances...should not be in the retirement business. The individual would be infinitely better off if they put their money into the stock market, bought land...invested privately. For healthcare, the government's got versions of healthcare. The military has coverage...talk to soldiers about the service they get. The poor and elderly are covered...ask them if they like the coverage they get. No one should be forced to have health insurance in a free country. If you want to roll the dice and bet on good health, you can spend that money how you see fit. If a major health issue hits you, you played the game, now you pay. It's no different than people who bought houses they could not afford, assuming the housing market would continue to boom..and now they are screwed.
2007-08-08 12:08:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yep. If they can't fix the simple then why do they think they can fix the complex? Under investing in infrastructure has been going on for years. Seems this is the easiest place to pinch money from so that they can fund other areas that squawk the most. Nothing like a power grid failure or a bridge collapse to get your attention. So where is the funding going to come from? A canceled program or tax increase? I hate to think where. S-CHIP?
2007-08-08 12:05:25 · answer #3 · answered by JohnFromNC 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, maybe if the Republican governor of Minnesota hadn't vetoed the funds to fix the bridges--calling the funding plan a tax hike--the bridge wouldn't have fallen. It is amazing to me how many conservaitves claim that government can do nothing, but then cite as evidence a problem created by a Republican whose inactivity led to the problem to begin with!
2007-08-08 12:01:46 · answer #4 · answered by epublius76 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
WEll, it wasn't directly the Federal Government's responsibility to fix the bridge. It fell to the state, which had the funds and didn't choose to spend them on this particular project. If that can be proven, they're gonna have to spend a lot more on the lawsuit.
2007-08-08 15:42:22 · answer #5 · answered by Charlie S 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Clearly, the answer to all of these questions is higher taxes.
Seriously, though, great question. What has the government done lately to earn our trust? Why would anyone want to depend on the government for anything after the Katrina boondoggle?
2007-08-08 12:04:55 · answer #6 · answered by goldspider79 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When is the last time you saw public demonstration for bridge repair? How about never . . . The government is accountable to the people, if we don't care - they won't either. Quit blaming the government for constituent apathy.
2007-08-08 12:03:27 · answer #7 · answered by CHARITY G 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i say it before and I say it again. What is your solution? What we have is not working and 45 million poor people with no health insurance and even more with SS are easy to convince if they don't have to pay for the solution. And those are plenty of votes.
2007-08-08 12:02:00 · answer #8 · answered by Jose R 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Aaaah. Funny how people think the government is worthless AND the savior of all mankind - depending on their agenda, that is.
2007-08-08 11:57:21 · answer #9 · answered by smellyfoot ™ 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
they can't..I don't why people would trust the government with their healthcare
2007-08-08 13:32:22 · answer #10 · answered by John 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋