#30 Calvin Coolidge Legacy

[vcczar 0]

From now on, I'll put up a new presidential poll after 12 votes:

@Patine @jvikings1 @Reagan04 @Dallas @Sanser2016 @CalebsParadox @lok1999 @jnewt @ThePotatoWalrus  @SiorafasNaCillini @servo75 @Presidentinsertname @Falcon @Take Me to La Riva @TheMiddlePolitical @Zach @Sunnymentoaddict @streiner @Conservative Elector 2 @Jayavarman @SeanFKennedy @QuickHead555 @goTBrays @warren2016 @victor1313 @TheLiberalKitten @Biden Should've Run @wolves @Socialist Bernie @Mordechai @michaelsdiamonds @chunkbuster11 @admin_270 @VanMav @pilight

Here's the new poll, which will be used towards a forum ranking. 

All previous presidents have polls in this forum with the number of their presidency before their name.

Please take these polls if you have not done so already. 

If anyone needs clarification/definition of an event/decision, then I'll be glad to provide one. 

****NOTE: IF YOU COULD NOT TAKE THE JAMES BUCHANAN POLL, PLEASE LOOK AT THE QUESTIONS AND LET ME KNOW WHICH EVENTS/DECISIONS (IF ANY) YOU AGREE WITH AS WELL AS YOUR ANSWERS TO QUESTION 2 and 3. You can PM me. THANKS! (I need one more vote)**** 

[vcczar 0]

That should read "increased penalties for violating prohibition laws"

[Patine 35]

54 minutes ago, vcczar said:

From now on, I'll put up a new presidential poll after 12 votes:

@Patine @jvikings1 @Reagan04 @Dallas @Sanser2016 @CalebsParadox @lok1999 @jnewt @ThePotatoWalrus  @SiorafasNaCillini @servo75 @Presidentinsertname @Falcon @Take Me to La Riva @TheMiddlePolitical @Zach @Sunnymentoaddict @streiner @Conservative Elector 2 @Jayavarman @SeanFKennedy @QuickHead555 @goTBrays @warren2016 @victor1313 @TheLiberalKitten @Biden Should've Run @wolves @Socialist Bernie @Mordechai @michaelsdiamonds @chunkbuster11 @admin_270 @VanMav @pilight

Here's the new poll, which will be used towards a forum ranking. 

All previous presidents have polls in this forum with the number of their presidency before their name.

Please take these polls if you have not done so already. 

If anyone needs clarification/definition of an event/decision, then I'll be glad to provide one. 

****NOTE: IF YOU COULD NOT TAKE THE JAMES BUCHANAN POLL, PLEASE LOOK AT THE QUESTIONS AND LET ME KNOW WHICH EVENTS/DECISIONS (IF ANY) YOU AGREE WITH AS WELL AS YOUR ANSWERS TO QUESTION 2 and 3. You can PM me. THANKS! (I need one more vote)**** 

What a lump of political deadweight! There's only a small handful of things he did I have any agreement with...

[pilight 2]

Coolidge was the only president born on the 4th of July.  Coolidge's inauguration was the first to be broadcast on radio.  He was also the first to make a radio address from the White House.

[LokiLoki22 0]

It always cracks me up to see people vote in ways I don't expect.

 

[servo75 0]

Great President, started the return to "normalcy" after the destruction of Wilson's reign administration.  I don't understand what's not to like about "Silent Cal."  He wasn't an interventionist and didn't micromanage the economy.  I did not answer the part about overseeing the roaring 20s because I don't think that was his doing, though I give him a lot of credit for lowering taxes and regulations.

As for Question #2, I think everyone knows my answer to that

[Patine 35]

36 minutes ago, servo75 said:

Great President, started the return to "normalcy" after the destruction of Wilson's reign administration.  I don't understand what's not to like about "Silent Cal."  He wasn't an interventionist and didn't micromanage the economy.  I did not answer the part about overseeing the roaring 20s because I don't think that was his doing, though I give him a lot of credit for lowering taxes and regulations.

As for Question #2, I think everyone knows my answer to that

I notice you were the only one who praised him for not intervening in the Mississippi Floods. Are you of the opinion that federal aid to natural disasters, even if the infrastructures and capabilities of the states effected are completely inadequate to deal with it, must still be maintained at all costs and the families of those who die and the owners of the property destroyed are supposed to somehow understand, suck it up, and praise the Constitution and the wisdom of following it to the letter (like no doubt the hungry, homeless, unemployed workers suffering only because of some greedy, exploitative bank executives are expected to do so when Hoover and FDR come around).

[servo75 0]

2 hours ago, Patine said:

I notice you were the only one who praised him for not intervening in the Mississippi Floods. Are you of the opinion that federal aid to natural disasters, even if the infrastructures and capabilities of the states effected are completely inadequate to deal with it, must still be maintained at all costs and the families of those who die and the owners of the property destroyed are supposed to somehow understand, suck it up, and praise the Constitution and the wisdom of following it to the letter (like no doubt the hungry, homeless, unemployed workers suffering only because of some greedy, exploitative bank executives are expected to do so when Hoover and FDR come around).

As soon as you show me where the Constitution it says that the Federal (as opposed to state and local) government is responsible for every disaster that happens everywhere in the country, I'll agree with you.  The attitude that progressives like FDR created, that the Federal government (as opposed to state, local, and private charity) is here to solve all our problems, pay our expenses, right every inequity, guarantee everyone a living wage, pay for everyone's college and healthcare, is the same attitude that gave us hundreds of government agencies, tens of thousands of pages of regulations, and most importantly $20 trillion in debt.  Sorry if it's not the answer you like, but it is not the government's job.  America was founded on individualism, on hard work, and people helping each other, not depending on the Federal government to bandage every paper cut you get.  It also creates dependence and creates the nanny state which tries to tell people they're not allowed to possess guns or marijuana.  If you keep depending on the government for everything, then you can't be surprised when they want to control aspects of your life.  Oppressive prohibition laws, spying on U.S. citizens, these are all outgrowths of the Progressive belief that "government knows best." Like your parents used to tell you, "If you live under my roof, you'll follow my rules."  That's what Progressivism is about - playing on our fears and then getting us to believe that Big Government and government alone can solve our ills. Once that happens they get to control our lives.  Do you think for one moment that the "common-sense gun legislation" movement has ANYTHING to do with safety?  Welfare, Social Security, oppressive gun laws, drug prohibition, Obamacare - what do they all have in common?  They place the Government in control of our lives under the guise of "the public good."  And we keep falling for it!!  Both parties are guilty of that.  At a  certain point we have to let state government, local government and private charities handle things like this, the way they're supposed to.  If this seems like a cold response, that's only a symptom of our nation's loss of moral compass and founding principles, and people like the Roosevelts, Woodrow Wilson, LBJ and Obama are responsible for this attack on American values which is why in my opinion they belong in the trash bin of Presidential history.  It's also why Coolidge was the last truly good President we've had, with the possible exception of Reagan.

[Patine 35]

10 minutes ago, servo75 said:

As soon as you show me where the Constitution it says that the Federal (as opposed to state and local) government is responsible for every disaster that happens everywhere in the country, I'll agree with you.  The attitude that progressives like FDR created, that the Federal government (as opposed to state, local, and private charity) is here to solve all our problems, pay our expenses, right every inequity, guarantee everyone a living wage, pay for everyone's college and healthcare, is the same attitude that gave us hundreds of government agencies, tens of thousands of pages of regulations, and most importantly $20 trillion in debt.  Sorry if it's not the answer you like, but it is not the government's job.  America was founded on individualism, on hard work, and people helping each other, not depending on the Federal government to bandage every paper cut you get.  It also creates dependence and creates the nanny state which tries to tell people they're not allowed to possess guns or marijuana.  If you keep depending on the government for everything, then you can't be surprised when they want to control aspects of your life.  Oppressive prohibition laws, spying on U.S. citizens, these are all outgrowths of the Progressive belief that "government knows best." Like your parents used to tell you, "If you live under my roof, you'll follow my rules."  That's what Progressivism is about - playing on our fears and then getting us to believe that Big Government and government alone can solve our ills. Once that happens they get to control our lives.  Do you think for one moment that the "common-sense gun legislation" movement has ANYTHING to do with safety?  Welfare, Social Security, oppressive gun laws, drug prohibition, Obamacare - what do they all have in common?  They place the Government in control of our lives under the guise of "the public good."  And we keep falling for it!!  Both parties are guilty of that.  At a  certain point we have to let state government, local government and private charities handle things like this, the way they're supposed to.  If this seems like a cold response, that's only a symptom of our nation's loss of moral compass and founding principles, and people like the Roosevelts, Woodrow Wilson, LBJ and Obama are responsible for this attack on American values which is why in my opinion they belong in the trash bin of Presidential history.  It's also why Coolidge was the last truly good President we've had, with the possible exception of Reagan.

Okay, you've taken the question completely beyond it's scope without answering it. I was asking about Federal assistance to natural disasters where the states affected do not have the resources or infrastructures to deal with it themselves. In that case, would it be a wrong and evil thing. I wasn't talking about drug restrictions, permanent welfare states, gun laws, and paper cuts. The situation I was referring is somewhat of an exception to the standard divisions of power rule because of a situation that absolutely overwhelms the capabilities of the affected states. Now, with the question's parameters clarified. what is your answer on that specifically?

[Bruce Fischer 0]

8 hours ago, servo75 said:

As soon as you show me where the Constitution it says that the Federal (as opposed to state and local) government is responsible for every disaster that happens everywhere in the country, I'll agree with you.  The attitude that progressives like FDR created, that the Federal government (as opposed to state, local, and private charity) is here to solve all our problems, pay our expenses, right every inequity, guarantee everyone a living wage, pay for everyone's college and healthcare, is the same attitude that gave us hundreds of government agencies, tens of thousands of pages of regulations, and most importantly $20 trillion in debt.  Sorry if it's not the answer you like, but it is not the government's job.  America was founded on individualism, on hard work, and people helping each other, not depending on the Federal government to bandage every paper cut you get.  It also creates dependence and creates the nanny state which tries to tell people they're not allowed to possess guns or marijuana.  If you keep depending on the government for everything, then you can't be surprised when they want to control aspects of your life.  Oppressive prohibition laws, spying on U.S. citizens, these are all outgrowths of the Progressive belief that "government knows best." Like your parents used to tell you, "If you live under my roof, you'll follow my rules."  That's what Progressivism is about - playing on our fears and then getting us to believe that Big Government and government alone can solve our ills. Once that happens they get to control our lives.  Do you think for one moment that the "common-sense gun legislation" movement has ANYTHING to do with safety?  Welfare, Social Security, oppressive gun laws, drug prohibition, Obamacare - what do they all have in common?  They place the Government in control of our lives under the guise of "the public good."  And we keep falling for it!!  Both parties are guilty of that.  At a  certain point we have to let state government, local government and private charities handle things like this, the way they're supposed to.  If this seems like a cold response, that's only a symptom of our nation's loss of moral compass and founding principles, and people like the Roosevelts, Woodrow Wilson, LBJ and Obama are responsible for this attack on American values which is why in my opinion they belong in the trash bin of Presidential history.  It's also why Coolidge was the last truly good President we've had, with the possible exception of Reagan.

Patine was referring to government intervention in national disasters which states can't handle. Think Katrina. I could see this as "insure[ing] domestic Tranquility," "providing for the common defence [sic]," and "promoting the general Welfare."

[servo75 0]

6 hours ago, Bruce Fischer said:

Patine was referring to government intervention in national disasters which states can't handle. Think Katrina. I could see this as "insure[ing] domestic Tranquility," "providing for the common defence [sic]," and "promoting the general Welfare."

Thank you for the clarification.  I suppose I went a little expansive in my answer, but the general idea still stands.  You may not like this but the answer is privatization.

So let's use your example of Katrina.  I remember the biggest complaints at that time were about FEMA, how they were inefficient, late to respond, how homeowners took forever to get their insurance settlements and on.  We can blame it on George W. Bush all we want, but either way, it's still a government solution which is intrinsically inefficient.  With few exceptions, the government touches gold and it turns into lead.  I dare say that if a FEMA-like organization was privately run, it would have been run more cheaply and efficiently. 

Q: "But we can't trust private companies who are only interested in profit..."

A: Yes and that's actually a good thing! It's the very idea of profit that provides incentives to do things well.  The government is supposed to be this big altruistic father-like entity that is only out to do good, but they have no incentive to innovate because these agencies are run by unelected bureaucrats who are unanswerable to the public they're supposed to serve.  And because there's no incentive to rein in budgets or spend efficiently, they inevitably become expanded bureaucracies with tons of regulations that just weigh things down even more.  If a private disaster relief company messed the relief effort up that badly, there'd be hell to pay.  But because it's the government, they're untouchable.  Not convinced?  Look at the Veterans Administration, Obamacare, and see what happens when government sticks its nose where it doesn't belong - which other than national defense is practically everywhere.

In fact we need to extend it to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, any public service.  It's a fact that private companies are more efficient and cost-effective because if they're not they go out of business.  You think politicians and government agents are so altruistic?  Do they not want their pork-barrel projects or campaign funds?  This will make these agencies more efficient and cut our national debt at the same time.

[Patine 35]

31 minutes ago, servo75 said:

Thank you for the clarification.  I suppose I went a little expansive in my answer, but the general idea still stands.  You may not like this but the answer is privatization.

So let's use your example of Katrina.  I remember the biggest complaints at that time were about FEMA, how they were inefficient, late to respond, how homeowners took forever to get their insurance settlements and on.  We can blame it on George W. Bush all we want, but either way, it's still a government solution which is intrinsically inefficient.  With few exceptions, the government touches gold and it turns into lead.  I dare say that if a FEMA-like organization was privately run, it would have been run more cheaply and efficiently. 

Q: "But we can't trust private companies who are only interested in profit..."

A: Yes and that's actually a good thing! It's the very idea of profit that provides incentives to do things well.  The government is supposed to be this big altruistic father-like entity that is only out to do good, but they have no incentive to innovate because these agencies are run by unelected bureaucrats who are unanswerable to the public they're supposed to serve.  And because there's no incentive to rein in budgets or spend efficiently, they inevitably become expanded bureaucracies with tons of regulations that just weigh things down even more.  If a private disaster relief company messed the relief effort up that badly, there'd be hell to pay.  But because it's the government, they're untouchable.  Not convinced?  Look at the Veterans Administration, Obamacare, and see what happens when government sticks its nose where it doesn't belong - which other than national defense is practically everywhere.

In fact we need to extend it to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, any public service.  It's a fact that private companies are more efficient and cost-effective because if they're not they go out of business.  You think politicians and government agents are so altruistic?  Do they not want their pork-barrel projects or campaign funds?  This will make these agencies more efficient and cut our national debt at the same time.

Well, I can see you've read "The Wealth of Nations," but somehow the world's biggest corporations don't seem to end up beholden to those cherished ideals and "incentives" so much and often seem to find ways through underhanded business practices, operating in multiple countries to pick and choose corporate laws and taxes at any given time, hiding behind subsidiaries that aren't always apparent as belonging to a parent company without a lot of dedicated digging, bankrupting front corporations instead of the parent corporation or major proprietors or shareholders taking the fall for bad investments (that tactic was a personal favourite of Donald Trump back in the '90's), lobbying governments to get the terms they want, and other Machiavellian schemes to make sure this system you (and many other pro-lasses-faire economists) so idealize doesn't actually end up working as intended, and the big corporations still rake in huge profits even if they make disastrous botch after disastrous botch.

[pilight 2]

58 minutes ago, servo75 said:

see what happens when government sticks its nose where it doesn't belong - which other than national defense is practically everywhere

National defense is also run by the government, and it has the same problems with waste, inefficiency, and bureaucracy that all government operations have.  It would be better run if it were privatized.

1 hour ago, servo75 said:

I dare say that if a FEMA-like organization was privately run, it would have been run more cheaply and efficiently. 

There's no profit to be made by such an organization, which is why none exist and didn't exist even before FEMA was created.  People who have had everything they own destroyed by a natural disaster are likely to have a hard time paying for such services.

[servo75 0]

3 hours ago, pilight said:

National defense is also run by the government, and it has the same problems with waste, inefficiency, and bureaucracy that all government operations have.  It would be better run if it were privatized.

There's no profit to be made by such an organization, which is why none exist and didn't exist even before FEMA was created.  People who have had everything they own destroyed by a natural disaster are likely to have a hard time paying for such services.

If you're talking about intelligence, I agree.  Military on the other hand is a function of Federal government.

No profit?  Insurance companies make profit all the time.  In terms of cost, if you stopped taxing citizens for running them, or better yet, do a public-private partnership and refund the difference in tax refunds, then it's a win-win.  Here's what former Congressman Ron Paul had to say in an interview with Anderson Cooper on CNN:

Well, I mean from the start of FEMA being involved and taking control, and taking over this management, they aren't very efficient. They're very inefficient....They would have been better of in Katrina if they had just written a check to everybody and not gotten involved in all the mess. They handed checks to people who didn't even live there. I don't know how anybody could defend the inefficiency of what went on in Katrina.It really hasn't changed. It is part of the Department of Homeland Security. All you have to do is look at the TSA, that's another favorite bureaucracy that American people don't like.

[pilight 2]

15 minutes ago, servo75 said:

Military on the other hand is a function of Federal government.

It would run more efficiently if they contracted it out.  As it stands, the US military is the most bloated sacred cow in the entire federal government.

[ThePotatoWalrus 0]

Best President to ever walk this Earth. Period.

[Patine 35]

53 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Best President to ever walk this Earth. Period.

Forgive the uneducated, coarse, oh-so-common Internet slang, but - WTF???

[jnewt 0]

58 minutes ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Best President to ever walk this Earth. Period.

April Fool's Day was two weeks ago

[servo75 0]

On 4/14/2017 at 11:09 AM, Patine said:

Forgive the uneducated, coarse, oh-so-common Internet slang, but - WTF???

 

On 4/14/2017 at 10:14 AM, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Best President to ever walk this Earth. Period.

Definitely the best of the post-founding era.  He was the last President to believe in small government and the Constitution. 

[CentristGuy 0]

Can I answer in this poll? Even if im a noob newcomer and I wasnt mentioned? 

Sorry for the grammar english is my sixth language ??

[vcczar 0]

10 hours ago, HomosexualSocialist said:

Can I answer in this poll? Even if im a noob newcomer and I wasnt mentioned? 

Sorry for the grammar english is my sixth language ??

You can vote in all the polls if you want to.