Yeah, that is pretty much my view as well. One of the biggest “definitions” in my area of practice is “disability.” I guarantee that it does not mean whatever you might think it means as you use it in conversation. For purposes of my agency it simply describes one (of several) requirements one must meet to be eligible for certain benefits.
And our regs specify that we are not bound by any other public or private organization’s determination that an individual is “disabled.”
There are examples of the feds coordinating things. FAFSA comes readily to mind. In my mind that is the type of efficiency they could provide with respect to health insurance.
Why government doesn’t work is simple. It has no accountablity. You don’t have to explain anything to anyone but your boss.
And ultimately who is your boss. Voters who vote in their self interest and not what’s good.
Look virtually everyone wants to help the homeless, the sick, the aged, and such. But if they actually have to DO something about it, then they aren’t so eager.
Government programs aren’t tied together, because each President, each Congress has its own idea and once you get a good job, you want to keep it.
But in the real world you generally have some sort of check to verify this. Not so in governent.
Take Chicago which is very corrupt citywise. The city workers of Chicago have a huge voter turn out. The aldermen make sure that the city workers get great benefits and such, 'caused they’ll vote to keep those same alderman in for life. So the circle of corruption and incompetence continues.
I saw a news story on ABC-News where a person who wants to run for the Senate of the United State, can expect to spend between 25-30 million dollars. So you can see this doesn’t produce good people, it produces people who are rich or have rich friends or the ability to raise such large funds.
Sure. But your point was, and I’ll go ahead and quote it here:
Emphasis mine.
Do you have a different working understanding of the term “just have”, or can we operate under the assumption that your initial statement was wrong? Or possibly we could get back to the actual discussion, dear.
too inefficient
The expenditures of the FG boggle the mind…and there is so little useful output! Take the Dept. of Education: started by Jimmy Carter…now an $80 billion annual budget. Output? Nil!
Immaterial? That’s actually the crux of this discussion.
HUD: Here’s 5 races to choose from.
US Census: Here’s 14 plus a write-in section.
See? They don’t line up. Arguing about whether or not there is a list or not on a census form is completely beside the point, because either way, it’s still different.
I’ll be generous and assume you didn’t know that federal student loan subsidies and Pell grants come out of that $80 billion budget and not some magic education-aid hat… Pell grants sucked up about $27 billion; I don’t know how much was spent on loan subsidies, but I’d guess about the same amount.
I had completely misunderstood the point of your argument- I didn’t realize you were talking about the 5 v. 14 thing. Sorry, carry on.