tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4962969789392187198.post4281873514492756976..comments2023-04-13T06:27:39.208-07:00Comments on Kakistocracy Report: Proposal: A Limited Government AmendmentKarl Uppianohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04857875236624845139noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4962969789392187198.post-21800580780318209952010-01-01T16:51:17.810-08:002010-01-01T16:51:17.810-08:00Kris, I agree that 78 years might be long enough f...Kris, I agree that 78 years might be long enough for politicians to do significant mischief to this amendment. That is why one of my suggestions is to include language that would discourage "postmodern" interpretation of it. <br /><br />Having said that, I would also say that this is just a proposal, and I am certainly open to discussion and compromise. It wouldn't hurt my feelings Karl Uppianohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04857875236624845139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4962969789392187198.post-74073918208819693762010-01-01T16:26:44.331-08:002010-01-01T16:26:44.331-08:00Karl your LGA is right on.
Might I also suggest a...Karl your LGA is right on.<br /><br />Might I also suggest as a matter of simplisity that we look at the ratio of public to private sector in the 1930's. (Since I don't know that that is I am going to substitute with a guess of 30/70.) Rather than taking 78 years to peel back this rotten onion, because I don't believe it should take that much time or that they wouldn't monkey Kris Haltermanhttp://www.bhamteaparty.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4962969789392187198.post-2859546282483375412009-11-17T16:02:55.945-08:002009-11-17T16:02:55.945-08:00The founders also focused on the matter of debt.
C...The founders also focused on the matter of debt.<br />China holding 1.3 trillion of US debt.<br />The founders would as Frank Zappa said: Freak out.<br />2000 page 'bills' and 107 trillion in unpaid for promises.<br />They would absolutely,'freak compleeeeeetly out'.BIGEAGLEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05975005966629583875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4962969789392187198.post-51216774037807770482009-11-17T12:50:12.131-08:002009-11-17T12:50:12.131-08:00BIGEAGLE,
Yes, I think there would be a "sch...BIGEAGLE,<br /><br />Yes, I think there would be a "schedule" for deletions for each year leading up to the target size and scope. Once we reach the target size and scope, then the deletions would be one-for-one, that is, steady-state. <br /><br />We need to be on the lookout for crafty politicians finding ways to circumvent the intent of the LGA and to continue to grow government. For Karl Uppianohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04857875236624845139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4962969789392187198.post-35690414330089666532009-11-17T10:19:34.469-08:002009-11-17T10:19:34.469-08:00Karl,
Regarding the reduction mandate; "to re...Karl,<br />Regarding the reduction mandate; "to reach the target 1930 size and scope in 78 years."<br />Would there be a need for a minimum number of yearly deletions in each of the indentified areas? In order to prevent a stalling 'grip' on the status-quo. <br /><br />Additionally, would it be smart to limit any bill/law to under 100 pages of language or even 50?<br /><br />AndBIGEAGLEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05975005966629583875noreply@blogger.com