Annette Naake
All right, here's MY little rant.
Dan wrote:
If local
governments take
care of broken bridges without fed funding (adhering to safe practices,
of
course), then you don't have to send money to someone to make a
decision to
send
money back.
There are not many states that could afford to build adequate highways and
bridges; monitor wastewater treatment (or is that "unnecessary
regulation"?); pay for their own military defense; and so on, on their own.
In states that can, an attitude like this would soon devolve into the urban
parts of the state refusing to send tax dollars to the rural parts ("We
built our own overpass. That 137-mile stretch of highway is your problem.")
Where does it end? Isn't it to the advantage of all Americans to have
modern transportation, safe working conditions, etc., everywhere in the
country? Even people from perfect states sometimes have to do business with
or travel to other parts of the nation, don't they? I'm sure there are times
when you need a vacation from all that glorious perfection.
Being in Wisconsin, (a negative balance fed dollars state) we are very
aware
that the only net product we receive from the fed government is
promises
and
regulations.
The federal government represents all of us in this country. By extension,
me. By extension, you're calling me a freeloader. I take exception.
And even for those among us -- I refer, of course, to Wisconsin residents --
superior enough to regulate themselves properly, federal regulations protect
the quality of water and food we get from other states or abroad (after all,
man does not live on cheese alone) as well as our civil rights and those of
our fellow Americans.
So be grateful.
Annette
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Dan wrote:
If local
governments take
care of broken bridges without fed funding (adhering to safe practices,
of
course), then you don't have to send money to someone to make a
decision to
send
money back.
There are not many states that could afford to build adequate highways and
bridges; monitor wastewater treatment (or is that "unnecessary
regulation"?); pay for their own military defense; and so on, on their own.
In states that can, an attitude like this would soon devolve into the urban
parts of the state refusing to send tax dollars to the rural parts ("We
built our own overpass. That 137-mile stretch of highway is your problem.")
Where does it end? Isn't it to the advantage of all Americans to have
modern transportation, safe working conditions, etc., everywhere in the
country? Even people from perfect states sometimes have to do business with
or travel to other parts of the nation, don't they? I'm sure there are times
when you need a vacation from all that glorious perfection.
Being in Wisconsin, (a negative balance fed dollars state) we are very
aware
that the only net product we receive from the fed government is
promises
and
regulations.
The federal government represents all of us in this country. By extension,
me. By extension, you're calling me a freeloader. I take exception.
And even for those among us -- I refer, of course, to Wisconsin residents --
superior enough to regulate themselves properly, federal regulations protect
the quality of water and food we get from other states or abroad (after all,
man does not live on cheese alone) as well as our civil rights and those of
our fellow Americans.
So be grateful.
Annette
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
[email protected]
Ok, but where does the constitution give the right to the federal
government to be involved in that issue?
Sheila
Isn't it to the advantage of all Americans to have
government to be involved in that issue?
Sheila
Isn't it to the advantage of all Americans to have
> modern transportation, safe working conditions, etc., everywherein the
> country?