Religion and Engineers

Professional Engineer & PE Exam Forum

Help Support Professional Engineer & PE Exam Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I can tell you right now that Boulder (liberal city to my northwest) and Colorado Springs (conservative city to the south) have a very large gap in their belief structure that even the state government has a hard time appeasing both. I can't imagine trying to create legislation to control Texas and California.
I'm pretty sure Boulder and Colorado Springs are pretty much polar opposites to a higher degree than Texas and California! It would essentially be like putting Cheech and Chong and the Pope in a van for a road trip.

There, I brought us back to religion :) Discuss the Tao of Cheech. I'll start:

"Duuuuuddddeee."

 
:popcorn: It's been awhile since we've had a good debate...
 
And I note you enjoy government intervention when it meets your own particular moral test. Me too. All I am saying is that this has to be hashed out by the system established in the Constiution and the State legislatures. During time, the people debate and decide what level of regulation they want. It might not be what you like, or it might not be what I like.
I'm going to go ahead and ignore the rest of your post because it's exactly the type of useless bickering I was hoping to avoid. I will just say this, and it will probably answer any other questions you have of me, I would tolerate a government that was firmly controlled by the letter (not the unending interpretation of the spirit) of the Constitution. But as far as me "enjoy[ing] government intervention when it meets your own particular moral test", you are incorrect. There is not a single service or product that the US government provides to me that could not be provided cheaper, better, and more efficiently by the private sector. If people want something, there will be somebody there to sell it to them...roads, education, police, arbitration, etc...and if the seller wishes to charge too much for their service, then the populace has the power to vote with their wallets.

 
I'm going to go ahead and ignore the rest of your post because it's exactly the type of useless bickering I was hoping to avoid. I will just say this, and it will probably answer any other questions you have of me, I would tolerate a government that was firmly controlled by the letter (not the unending interpretation of the spirit) of the Constitution. But as far as me "enjoy[ing] government intervention when it meets your own particular moral test", you are incorrect. There is not a single service or product that the US government provides to me that could not be provided cheaper, better, and more efficiently by the private sector. If people want something, there will be somebody there to sell it to them...roads, education, police, arbitration, etc...and if the seller wishes to charge too much for their service, then the populace has the power to vote with their wallets.
You're right. The argument is pointless because although I agree with some of what you say, I get the impression you are one of these anarcho-capitalists, who as far as I know don't really even believe in the Constitution or Congress or courts or anything. If you believe in the free markets providing everything, including national defense, a court system, every single thing, then I don't know why you even bring up the Constitution, much of which is expressly antithetical to that point of view.

It is surprising that this system that suposedly works so well as never been tried anywhere. So I don't know how we would prove or disprove your contentions.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm pretty sure Boulder and Colorado Springs are pretty much polar opposites to a higher degree than Texas and California! It would essentially be like putting Cheech and Chong and the Pope in a van for a road trip.
There, I brought us back to religion :) Discuss the Tao of Cheech. I'll start:

"Duuuuuddddeee."

I was just trying to illustrate the population differences. Trying to take a system that can't appease a few hundred thousand will fail miserably when the population is in the millions.

Cheech & Chong and the Pope in a van for a road trip? That sounds like something that you would see in the spring linup on Fox...

 
I was just trying to illustrate the population differences. Trying to take a system that can't appease a few hundred thousand will fail miserably when the population is in the millions.
Cheech & Chong and the Pope in a van for a road trip? That sounds like something that you would see in the spring linup on Fox...
I was just saying the differences in just the school populations (CU versus USAFA) was huge, let alone the actual towns. I was agreeing with you.

Crap. I need to copyright the idea before it's a reality show.

Would people really "buy" roads if the government didn't provide them? Would you "buy" welfare?

 
Would people really "buy" roads if the government didn't provide them? Would you "buy" welfare?
Wasn't that was the original point of the tollway system? Now states rob that fund to pay for lots of other non road things.

 
But they would need to form big groups to pay for anything...Like E-470 in Colorado was set up that way, but it's one of the few tollroads anywhere in the region and so it struggles. There are too many "free" roads around. How much would it change travel if EVERY road were a toll road or needed some fund to draw from? Would your neighborhood street become sponsored by some big company? Like instead of Main Street it would be Xcel Energy Street, like major ballparks. I'm intrigued.

 
But they would need to form big groups to pay for anything...Like E-470 in Colorado was set up that way, but it's one of the few tollroads anywhere in the region and so it struggles. There are too many "free" roads around. How much would it change travel if EVERY road were a toll road or needed some fund to draw from? Would your neighborhood street become sponsored by some big company? Like instead of Main Street it would be Xcel Energy Street, like major ballparks. I'm intrigued.
Origins of our country, thats exactly what roads consisted of. That's where the term 'turnpike' comes from, as roads were typ manned by sometimes nefarious companies who would allow paid passers thru by raising or turning the pike [edit: not a fish] which blocked the way. Actual origins are from BC biblical times. . .tied back to religion (kidding)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess if it was all you knew, you'd go for it. However, taking the America we have today and dropping the government out of it seems like it would yield much different results.

 
But they would need to form big groups to pay for anything...Like E-470 in Colorado was set up that way, but it's one of the few tollroads anywhere in the region and so it struggles. There are too many "free" roads around. How much would it change travel if EVERY road were a toll road or needed some fund to draw from? Would your neighborhood street become sponsored by some big company? Like instead of Main Street it would be Xcel Energy Street, like major ballparks. I'm intrigued.
I guess it depends on the area. In IL (tollways only in northern IL) there are lots of "free" roads for commuters, but it will take you forever. The tollways are bumper to bumper traffic, but they are the most direct route and still shorter than the "free" roads.

Our lovely governor doubled the price of tolls if you pay cash a few years ago. Even with our Ipass system, people I know pay $3/day just in tolls....but I'm getting off topic...

 
Off topic indeed - but on that note, come up to MI and see our lovely, non-toll roads, with i believe the most lenient weight restrictions concerning commericial hauling - all with the joys of rampant frost heave & aggressive snow removal tactics. Mudpuppy? Gymrat? can i get an amen?!

(whoops back to religion, i keep doing that. . .)

 
IThere is not a single service or product that the US government provides to me that could not be provided cheaper, better, and more efficiently by the private sector. If people want something, there will be somebody there to sell it to them...roads, education, police, arbitration, etc.
I'm all for smaller government, but this ABSOLUTE statement is absurd if you mean to say the free market will always step in to provide services - and the fair market price will settle on what the demand is willing to pay the supply. There are just too many barriers to entry for many "services and products". And, really, are you saying you'd trust every government function to a private organization? What about the government itself? Oh... right... you're an anarchist - you don't need no stinkin' government!

I hope this discussion remains civil... it's always interesting to learn how others unlike me think. It's the whole point of DIVERSITY.

 
Try not to overgeneralize people and create bias based on views held by a small percentage. It's like saying Mexicans prefer to eat beans and rice.
I don't understand why it's wrong to say Mexicans prefer to eat beans and rice. They do.

Just like Italians like to eat pasta and Chinese like to eat... well... Chinese food! These are well observed generalizations - not accurate for the entire population but valid nonetheless.

It was funny, though, the other day when the guys moving my furniture asked me to pick them up lunch. They were all from Central America but wanted me to get them Chinese food!

 
It was funny, though, the other day when the guys moving my furniture asked me to pick them up lunch. They were all from Central America but wanted me to get them Chinese food!
I was getting lunch at the mall last weekend and was standing in line for chinese food. I looked over at the BBQ place to see a young chinese couple... Oh the irony!

 
Back
Top