THE DISCUSSION IS OPEN - WEEK TWO - PRESIDENTIAL SERIES: UNREASONABLE MEN - April 18th - April 24th - Chapter Two - The Railroad- (pages 31 - 52) - No Spoilers, please

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Nita - we regret your brother's passing. We will be here waiting for you. I am sorry for your loss - he must have been also a great brother in addition to all of the stupendous accomplishments in his life.

[Kressel]

Yes, very sorry to hear.

[Mary]

So sorry, Nita. Your brother was amazing in so many ways.

[Michael]

I'm terribly sorry for you loss, Nita. TR can wait.

[Helga]

Nita, I am so sorry to hear of your loss. This is a sad time for you.

[Pamela]

So very sorry to hear of the loss of your brother, Nita. My sympathies to you and your family at such a difficult time.

[Nita]

Thank you all for your wonderful expressions of sympathy and support. This is truly a great group. I will rejoin you as soon as I am able.

[Robyn]

Nita wrote: "I am a little behind on my reading, as my brother (Goodreads author James W. Huston) recently passed away. I will catch up as soon as I can."

Nita - so sorry to hear about your brother.

[Bryan]

Great questions Michael. I like your answer, too, Charles.

1. Today's GOP: Most represent Aldrich, but there is a Cannon strain, too. You got a tug of war going that is in part tearing the party apart.

2. Balance. You get a sense that special interest/lobbyists do have more influence over the government system. I'd like to see campaign reform, perhaps some measure to keep lobbyists in check, but haven't figured out an answer how. In TR's time, it was really bad, as we see in this book.

Also, maybe it is more the people than the system that is creating dead-lock. We have had worse times that the government was at dead-lock (like the 1850s). We survived. As Charles indicates, maybe it is more ideology, the compromisers are rare and this system of government needs compromise. It is ok not to get everything you want as long as you get something. Today, compromise is seen by Republicans as sinners. Not a healthy governance attitude.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Hello Bryan - great post.

We all wish for campaign reform but the little we did have was gutted by the Citizens United ruling by our Supreme Court which frankly did not have to even address what it did in the broadest sense. A very political decision. For whatever reason nothing much has been done to rectify that imbalance to date.

I think these times are similar but somewhat worse. They really are adopting the "all or nothing approach" but I suspect it is mostly a result of being mean spirited and hopefully not - but it seems to be - as a result of a somewhat racial undertone in terms of the President. What they criticize him for is unbelievable considering his predecessors and the fact that many of them had summer White Houses and were away much more frequently that the current President. And of course they cannot get off of Obama Care which is actually called the Affordable Care Act.

Look at what they are doing or should I say not doing about the most palatable candidate to the Supreme Court they will ever see.

It is very unhealthy (I agree) and until a few of these diehards are voted out - they will not get the message.

[Betty]

I'm so very sorry to hear of your loss Nita. Please take care of yourself and your family as that should come first above all else <3

[Charles]

Bentley wrote: "Hello Bryan - great post.

We all wish for campaign reform but the little we did have was gutted by the Citizens United ruling by our Supreme Court which frankly did not have to even address what i..."

Everyone, along these lines perhaps you viewed the last Sunday's 60 Minutes episodes. The first part was quite depressing and illuminating at the same time. A Repulican congressman has offered a House Resolution to prevent all Representatives from making telephone calls personally to raise money. Turns out that all Congress people must raise $18,000 / week for their own and the party elections. So, post Citizens United (Bentley's mention) the reps must now spend up to 4 hours / day making cold calls, up from 90 minutes /day pre Citizens United. According to the report , they spend less time doing the people's work than they do dialing for $$. Say what you will about the corruption and malfeasance of TR's time, at least when they were in DC they were mostly working, I think. Also both parties were the same in their requirements and expectations of their members. It was not shocking info just a reminder of how we have fallen.
The resolution was not garnering much support either because no one wants to upset the money train even though it is dispiriting and a pathetic use of the citizen's time.
Eliminating all money from politics is a fantasy but it seems that perhaps we have reached an inflection point? A little off topic I know, but money and politics was an issue in 1912 as it is today, just more. Of it.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Excellent post Charles and may I add - on the money (smile)

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Folks, remember the author is in the house and if you have any questions about any event, person, bill, or anything else for that matter dealing with the book Unreasonable Men or Theodore Roosevelt, Bob LaFollette, etc. - please please post questions for the author Michael Wolraich who has been so giving of his time.

Here is the link - https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

All, we have some spoiler threads which I want you to be aware of because they can be a great help to you while reading the book:

a) We have the Weekly Non Spoiler threads - we open them up every week and we discuss the assigned reading for that week in depth - we have conversations on all of the people, events, laws, bills, etc. so please join in.

b) We have the Author’s Q&A thread (a spoiler thread) where you can ask Michael Wolraich any question you would like about his wonderful book - Unreasonable Men. This is an excellent opportunity for you and the author to interact. Please take advantage of it.

Here is the link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

c) We have the Bibliography thread - a spoiler thread - where we have listed and cited all of the books, articles and research material that Michael Wolraich has listed as research materials for his book. This is a wonderful list of other books and research material worth reading and looking at. Also if you have ancillary books and articles to add - this is the thread.

Here is the link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

d) We have the Glossary thread - a spoiler thread - where every day the moderators are putting together formal glossary entries on all of the important personages, events, bills, etc. in the book. We add them chapter by chapter every day and they make very interesting reading. Also please if you have ancillary material that you would like to add - please feel free to add your material, links, etc on this thread. It goes without saying that there is no self promotion. But this is a very important and useful thread for our readers. Please take advantage of this thread and use it often.

Here is the link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

e) We have the Table of Contents and Syllabus thread which is a spoiler thread and where you can find the layout of the book itself and its chapters and pagination. You also can find the timeline and reading schedule for the book itself.

This is an important thread and here is the link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

f) We have a thread showing samples of citations and how to do them. This could be very helpful to you.
Here is the link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
or if you need more detailed help:

Here is the link to the Mechanics of the Board thread - https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

g) If you are confused about what to do next or how to jump into the conversation - this is the thread for you - What Do I Do Next?

Here is the link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

h) If you are reader or group member who has not yet started the book and would like to read the reviews and watch the videos and the media regarding the book and its author - by all means go to the Introduction thread and read and watch what is there. There are a lot of links and reviews added.

Here is the link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

i) If you are interested in free book offers coming up and you want to find out what the criteria is for being considered and what are your responsibilities - then please by all means visit this thread which maps out our criteria and process:

Here is the link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

j) If you are shy and would like to learn how to jump into a discussion and read like an historian - by all means visit this thread - How to Jump Into Discussions

Here is the link:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

k) At the end of our discussion we will ask all readers and all recipients of the free book offer to review the book briefly and also to give their independent rating - this is part of the t’s and c’s - here is the link to the Book as a Whole and Final thoughts thread which will be opened up at the end of the discussion - this is of course a spoiler thread.
Here is the link: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

[John]

Sorry Nita for your loss. My deepest sympathies and condolences.

[Bryan]

Charles wrote: "Bentley wrote: "Hello Bryan - great post.

We all wish for campaign reform but the little we did have was gutted by the Citizens United ruling by our Supreme Court which frankly did not have to eve..."

So, true, now House members have to run all the time for office. How can you legislate?

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Very true

[Tomi]

Just a thought, as I read recent posts about the size of our government and the power of special-interest groups...maybe our nation is too big? Our population has grown and we are so diverse; seems difficult for the government to handle the needs and desires of so many. The British Empire got too big and broke up. The Roman Empire, the USSR...maybe it's our turn?

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Tomi I hear you but we were quite diverse at the beginning too - many different religious sects. I think our government is ideally suited to handle diversity (more so than other governments) - you only have to read the Declaration of Independence again.

I think you are confusing nation building and acquiring foreign lands and entities for their own country with a country that is growing in terms of its own population. The British Empire was all over the world and they took over countries and locations for their own purposes and made these entities part of the British Empire and they did it by force - the Roman Empire did the same. Now I am not saying that there was not some of this in the history of our country in terms of Western Expansion to acquire more land and the situation with Mexico but I do not see ourselves in the same vein. Although we used whatever means we had at our disposable to separate from a King we deemed a despot.

It may be that we are not addressing our fundamental values and are beginning to sound entitled and a bit taken with ourselves at times forgetting that each day is a new day and as a nation we need to be constantly striving for excellence not mediocrity. I think being satisfied with mediocrity is a real danger and lowering our standards in all areas of personal development and not engaging with our communities to improve our neighborhoods and where we live is another.

We seem so disenfranchised at times and rudderless. Yet there are so many examples of greatness in the nation itself. But it does not mean that all things are great, or great now or great still. It takes some work. I think our young people want to be entertained in school and that is a real issue - I do not remember being entertained - do you?

[Tomi]

Bentley wrote: "Tomi I hear you but we were quite diverse at the beginning too - many different religious sects. I think our government is ideally suited to handle diversity (more so than other governments) - you ..."

Agree - it was just a thought. And no, I wasn't entertained in school (except maybe that one time when someone - not mentioning any names!- let a frog loose in civics class, but that's another story!). I know my students thought they had to be entertained (I have been retired for about 5 years) and thought it was acceptable to fall asleep if I wasn't as much fun as, say, Saturday Night Live...definitely an issue. Life isn't always fun and we aren't preparing our students for the hard things.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

And that is great - that is what we are all here for - to hear each other's thoughts and discuss. I am glad you put it out there - others might agree with you and discourse is terrific.

Tomi, I did not know you were a teacher so you have obviously seen changes in attitudinal expectations over time. We are not and that is what I am most concerned about. The education, goals and motivation of our young people.

[Christopher]

Bentley wrote: "Discussion Question:

Chapter Two begins with this quote:

"If the Federal Government continues to centralize, we shall soon find that we have a vast bureaucratic government, which shall prove inef..."

Sorry it has taken me too long to respond to the discussions about this book. Things have been moving really fast in my life lately and I haven't been as on top of this as I should have. But, I have been keeping up with the reading and I hope to answer week 3's questions this weekend. Without further ado, here are my responses to this week's reading and questions.

1. a) Do you agree with the above statement? All of the time, some of the time or mostly never? Explain your position.

I do believe that, overall, centralized government is better than decentralized government if for no other reason than it is easier to lay blame on those within a centralized government for when things go wrong. Also, because the problems our nation and our world faces today require centralized government solutions, not decentralized.

Still, I am aware that centralizing government and bureaucracy does not always solve problems. Indeed, there is good social and political science research out there that says centralizing bureaucracy can make things worse rather than better. Therefore, we should always be careful about jumping immediately to centralized bureaucracy to solve our problems and should analyze it carefully.

b) Do you sometimes drive on your state's roads and bridges replete with potholes and wonder what your Senator or Congressman is doing about these road conditions in DC. Probably nothing because he is at the federal level - or are you interested in the infrastructure problems that cannot be fixed at the state level be mandated and rectified for the citizens of this country by the federal government? - for example, the lead pipes in Flint, Michigan?

It's funny you mention this because there was a pothole on my home street that was in just the right spot to be run over by one of my tires if I didn't consciously try to avoid it. It became so annoying at one point that I thought about writing a politician. It'd did get fixed relatively quickly, but while it was there I was thinking about contacting my city councilman, not my representative or my senator because I knew that, when it comes to potholes on city streets, my councilman would probably be the one to go to with my complaints. Still, the example of Flint, MI, shows that there are some problems that are too big for local or state governments to fix on their own, especially when state governments are the cause of those problems.

2. When things go wrong, do you think that your state has the ability to fix them? Do they have enough manpower, funds and other resources? What about when a big storm hits like Sandy or Katrina? Or do you think that the federal government should do something to fix the mess that your governor can or will not do? Or do you think that your state can only afford so much and if it did not get the help of the federal government many things would be swept under the carpet and ignored like the pipes in Flint, Michigan?

I live in CA where we have had serious problems with our debt and deficits in recent years, particularly in the 2000s. Be in 2010 we elected a very competent governor who has, thus far, overseen a revitalization of our state's budget and gotten us out of the mess we got into previously. There have been some examples of problems, like the natural gas leak that forced the evacuation of Porter Ranch near Los Angeles, but when compared to Flint's problems, our state responded relatively effectively and quickly to the crisis. So, I feel pretty confident that, with competent leadership, CA has what it takes to fix its problems.

3. Are you happy with your social security and medicare or medicaid or federal pensions? If so these are federal programs? Are you unhappy about the cost of prescription drugs and wish that the federal government would do more about it? Do you have children with special needs and have you found that your state and local government are not doing enough to educate and take care of your children and you think that the federal government should do more? Are you a college aged student or a parent of college aged students who are having problems affording to send your children to college or are you having a hard time trying to work, study or pay off big college loans? If so, do you think that the Federal government should be doing more? Do you think that Bernie Sanders is your candidate because he feels that college should be tuition free and students debt free or do you believe that Sanders has a great idea but what is his plan for paying for it. Do you think yourself a progressive, a liberal, a conservative, a moderate or an independent?

I would call myself a progressive and most of these hypotheticals don't apply to me, but I will say that I am fresh out of graduate school and having trouble finding work to pay off my debts. But, that is not the government's fault. In fact, because of govt. policies, I'm able to put my loan payments on hold for a short period while I look for work. Not only that, but without the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, I wouldn't have medical insurance right now and would be one serious injury from being in such massive debt that I could never climb my way out of it. That would be a great way to start my post-college life.

4. Are you the type of individual who feels that you had to do it all on your own and there is no free lunch - so the federal government should stay out of your business and be "seen and not heard" at the state level. And that your state can take care of what it needs to take care of without the federal government butting in?

If my previous answers are any indication, no I don't feel the federal government should be so limited that it can be drowned in a bath tub, as Grover Norquist has said. In this highly globalized age, the federal government has a necessary role to play in our economic lives and I am particularly unswayed by arguments that everyone can make something of their lives simply by working really hard. That has not been my experience in college or life. Everyone needs a little help to get ahead, especially in this world. Only the proud and foolish man says they never needed any help and won't accept it when offered.

5. Do you believe that a federal government that does more is any more corrupt than a federal government that does less? Do you believe that a federal government that does more is any more inefficient than a federal government that does less?

I don't think a big or small government is any more or less corrupt than the other. It's just part of mankind's fallen, sinful nature that men and women with power can be corrupted. Indeed, that's why it is important that we have laws and dedicated men and women in law enforcement and the media who root out corruption wherever it flourishes.

6. Explain your views on what your ideal federal and state government would look like?

Pardon me for going all metaphorical, but my ideal view on our federal system is that problems our viewed like a group of weightlifters. Each one can lift a certain size weight not their own, with local government lifting small weights with lots of repetitions, state government lifting medium weights with medium numbers of repetitions, and federal government lifting large weights with low repetitions. Now, each one of these weightlifters can lift on its own, but its stronger partner should always be there to spot their weaker partner and, when necessary, help lift the weight that turned out to be heavier than it looks.

7. Was Uncle Joe right or do you think he is either making a sweeping generalization or is he wrong?

I think that Uncle Joe was making a sweeping generalization, but wasn't too far off the mark in his own time. The spoil system was on the downward slide, but it was still there. Today though I would not think of centralized bureaucracy in the same terms.

8. Do you feel that corporations get many breaks that they should not be getting? Should corporations pay more? Should US corporations be allowed to get tax breaks and move their jobs offshore to other countries? Who should do more to keep corporations in line?

I do feel that many big corporations get too many breaks from govt. that they shouldn't be getting and that they should be paying more in taxes. Still, there is a good case to be made for supporting and subsidizing certain businesses, especially in this globalized economy where other governments have no problem doing so. There was a great debate about this on a recent Intelligence Squared US debate. Here is the link below for those of you interested in listening to it.

http://intelligencesquaredus.org/deba...

I see that there are other questions that deal with the book more directly. If I have time later today, I will try to answer them. But for now, here is my contribution to the discussion.

[Vincent]

Tomi wrote: "Just a thought, as I read recent posts about the size of our government and the power of special-interest groups...maybe our nation is too big? Our population has grown and we are so diverse; seems..."

Hi Tomi

I am responding about "our nation too big?" and not ignoring the subsequent exchange with Bentley.

So if a country of 320 million in a world of 7 billion cannot find a way to work together with a somewhat common heritage (most all of us had antecedents arrive in the last century and a half) and a common language how will we cope with global warming or maintaining world peace - ok getting to world peace?

We seem to be failing to educate our children to understand the world and accept their place in it. We seem to not anymore ask children in school to know current events (generally) and we seem to focus education towards employment more than "knowledge" - generally as I see it but not universally.

America, blessedly, has not experienced a war on our soil since 1865 and that was with ourselves - not not since 1814 from an outsider. Americans have not waited for bombs to fall hoping they miss them sitting in bomb shelters with fellow citizens - teachers, dishwashers, bankers, factory workers, sanitation workers, doctors etc etc... all in the same boat.

We need a driving force to find a non self focused national identity and I am not sure how to do this (this is my opinion) - so this is just an observation on your remark on our being too big. But I did see a ray of hope - do see? - in the Sanders campaign - all these people as individuals equaling the contributions of others from big givers and special interests etc. and working for Sanders - which ever political philosophy one has this is really inspirational as to how the American public can decide to come together. But this is not the book subject so I move on.thanks

[Tomi]

Vincent wrote: "Tomi wrote: "Just a thought, as I read recent posts about the size of our government and the power of special-interest groups...maybe our nation is too big? Our population has grown and we are so d..."

I don't believe there will ever be world peace and I don't see how any nation can successfully respond to global issues...too many people with too many different values and desires. I admit to being somewhat of an isolationist - I think we need to put our actions/concerns toward the things that divide our country rather than global issues. I'm not sure we have enough things in common in our nation...let alone the world.
I agree that our students are not getting to study current events (or history) enough to deal with the problems ahead. Part of that is due to the emphasis on passing government-mandated tests. Part of it is because our children are so used to having their social needs met immediately - TV, FB, etc. - that they don't know anything about delayed gratification. Governing a country takes time; too many don't realize that.
It's sad that being an American isn't enough of a national identity any more...wonder how that happened...

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Folks I am caught up on Week One and Week Two in terms of participation.

[Mary]

Hmmm. I had posted twice in this thread but apparently need to add more. Here goes.

"If the Federal Government continues to centralize, we shall soon find that we have a vast bureaucratic government, which shall prove inefficient if not corrupt." --- Uncle Joe

1. a) Do you agree with the above statement? All of the time, some of the time or mostly never? Explain your position.

In general, I agree with this statement. We've seen how Johnson's Great Society programs were so bloated that they simply blew through a lot of money without delivering lasting improvements to society. The Affordable Care Act, while delivering some welcome change, is similarly not sustainable. In contrast, states often experiment with solutions that can be models for other states.

b) Do you sometimes drive on your state's roads and bridges replete with potholes and wonder what your Senator or Congressman is doing about these road conditions in DC. Probably nothing because he is at the federal level - or are you interested in the infrastructure problems that cannot be fixed at the state level be mandated and rectified for the citizens of this country by the federal government? - for example, the lead pipes in Flint, Michigan?

My county has a 1% sales tax dedicated to fixing local roads - this program seems to work well. As far as the interstate system, Congress is as inept and irresponsible here as they are with so many issues. They use important issues as a platform for grandstanding on their ideologies (or else an excuse so they can continue their "pay to play" activities with big businesses). However, voters are to blame. Congress pays attention only when the populace does.

2. When things go wrong, do you think that your state has the ability to fix them? Do they have enough manpower, funds and other resources? What about when a big storm hits like Sandy or Katrina? Or do you think that the federal government should do something to fix the mess that your governor can or will not do? Or do you think that your state can only afford so much and if it did not get the help of the federal government many things would be swept under the carpet and ignored like the pipes in Flint, Michigan?

Wow, good questions. South Carolina had a thousand-year flood last October, and handled it pretty well with the help of local, state and federal resources. I know there are some people who still have not had their homes rebuilt and I'm not sure why. People should have flood insurance, and I'm not a fan of the federal government subsidizing it. If an insurance company won't insure a house, then you shouldn't be living there at taxpayer expense. As for Flint, pressure to keep costs down led to some bad decisions. I am in favor of federal regulations to keep people safe, since you can't count on officials to make the right decisions.

3. Are you happy with your social security and medicare or medicaid or federal pensions? If so these are federal programs? Are you unhappy about the cost of prescription drugs and wish that the federal government would do more about it? Do you think yourself a progressive, a liberal, a conservative, a moderate or an independent?

I call myself a left-leaning libertarian, or an independent moderate. The big entitlement programs are necessary - they have helped keep people out of poverty, so should remain and be protected. I would be fine with extending Medicare to everyone, or at least knocking down the healthcare company oligarchies in every state and allowing nationwide competition - that should take care of a lot of costs.

4. Are you the type of individual who feels that you had to do it all on your own and there is no free lunch - so the federal government should stay out of your business and be "seen and not heard" at the state level. And that your state can take care of what it needs to take care of without the federal government butting in?

Nobody does it on their own. There needs to be balance between the state and federal governments. The federal government should butt in when there are excesses, such as during the segregation days. It should be butting in to curtail the excesses of global investment banks so that we don't have another crisis.

5. Do you believe that a federal government that does more is any more corrupt than a federal government that does less? Do you believe that a federal government that does more is any more inefficient than a federal government that does less?

Corruption creeps in no matter what the size of government. A bigger federal government just means that the size of corruption is bigger, as can be seen by the expenditures on our military. I do believe the federal government is less efficient in many ways than state governments, simply given the complex scope of its players.

6. Explain your views on what your ideal federal and state government would look like?

For me, I would like to keep the federal government focused on the broad issues impacting the entire nation, such as interstate commerce and transportation, and national security. I don't think the federal government should use tax dollars for venture capitalism or for a global military force. State government should take care of the rest. I'm a bit conflicted on education, as I believe some states are irresponsible with their K-12 education, but I hope that the market will take care of those states, with businesses and people avoiding them. I'm not sure why there is such anti-intellectualism and fear of science in such states but I can't imagine they will thrive for long. I believe in freedom of religion but would like people not to use their religious beliefs in shaping legislation, other than the "thou shalt not kill or steal" type of laws.

7. Was Uncle Joe right or do you think he is either making a sweeping generalization or is he wrong?

8. Do you feel that corporations get many breaks that they should not be getting? Should corporations pay more? Should US corporations be allowed to get tax breaks and move their jobs offshore to other countries? Who should do more to keep corporations in line?

This is a tricky question. If corporations get hit with more tax to "pay their fair share" (whatever that is), they will likely pass on the cost to customers, or find some other way to lessen the impact on profits. Nevertheless, I feel strongly that states and the federal government should not provide tax breaks or other incentives for a business to locate in their region. If a business goes offshore to avoid taxation or for a cheaper labor force, then there should be a big tax penalty to sell in the country.

[Helga]

Mary, I'm from SC and would like to respond. I'm from Richland County and we also have been paying 1% sales tax for fixing the roads but have not seen much improvement especially after the 1000 year flood. The roads are horrible in my area. They filled some potholes and have metal plates on the roads to cover holes. And as to the flood, I was a victim of it. I did not have flood insurance because I do not live on a flood zone. My house was flooded when the Oct 4,2015 flooding occurred and 14 feet of water got in my yard, because the dam on Federal Property-Fort Jackson a few miles away, breached, so a lake ended up in our neighborhood. My house is on a hill so my house has a basement-lower level. This floor which also has our garage was flooded with 5 feet of water so we lost everything on that level (my husband’s office, furniture, heating system, hot water heaters, tools, etc. plus 2 cars.) FEMA came in and gave us $11k to assist. This was enough to hire a flood restoration company to gut this level and equipment for drying, humidifying, etc. We were fortunate that we have a lot of equity on our house so we qualified for a low interest loan, 1.8% SBA loan to rebuild. It has cost us about 100k thus far plus 2 new loans for cars. We did get auto insurance money for the cars which was enough for maybe 1 car. I am grateful for how fast FEMA came to our assistance, 1 week, and how quickly the SBA came to assist us and allow us to rebuild. Since there were 18 dams that breached, many homes, properties, roads and bridges were damaged. The dams that breached showed how flawed they were and not maintained in years. The Dam that breached at Fort Jackson and the lake that ended up in my neighborhood and others was shown to have been a “serious hazard” before the flood. Many of the other dams that breached also were not maintained and were private. It appears that the homeowners never worried about the risk or wanted to maintain them and the State never enforced them to maintain them. To date, these dams are still not repaired because there is no government assistance for them. The Oct flood inflicted $12 billion in damages to the state. Many homes have still not been repaired because some people cannot get the building permits to rebuild because they need to be elevated, and in other cases, the people don’t have the funds to rebuild because they don’t have the equity to qualify for an SBA loan. The maximum amount FEMA paid to flood victims who could not live in their homes was $33.3k and that’s not enough to rebuild your home if it was destroyed. In some cases the homes were bought by the government and demolished and have become green space.

Catastrophes like this and others costs the victims and state a lot. We are grateful for whatever support we can get from the government and state. But usually it takes their support and one’s own capital to properly rebuild. It has brought a boom in the area in construction.

[Mary]

Helga wrote: "Mary, I'm from SC and would like to respond. I'm from Richland County and we also have been paying 1% sales tax for fixing the roads but have not seen much improvement especially after the 1000 yea..."

Hi Helga - thanks for telling your story, and for filling me in on why some people couldn't rebuild. I also don't have flood insurance and was fortunate that the water never made it up my yard (I'm in Berkeley County). I sympathize for your loss. It's terrible about the dams, and let's hope people will learn that taxes are necessary to keep infrastructure in good shape, and to help out people who have been affected by acts of nature.

[Helga]

Hi Mary, Thank you for understanding. You were lucky that your area was not impacted like mine was. We do need to pay taxes to maintain infrastructure. Some of the homeowners who had dams that broke no longer have their views because they no longer have their lakes. Their property value has gone down significantly, some as much as 50%. They are now working with their region and the county to pay property taxes for bonds so that they can rebuild their private dams and also private roads. Now they realize how important it was to maintain their dams and roads and bridges and not just their homes. Sometimes it takes a disaster to get things done. My house is back to normal and renovated.

[Teri]

Reading your guys' stories about the flooding, infrastructure, etc., it came to mind that I personally don't pay attention to whether those taxes ever get increased. Surely as time goes by, the costs to repair infrastructure increases. It's now something I'll pay attention to in my own area to see if increase hikes are ever proposed and how often.

The last few years, we've had a lot of flooding in our area due to storms and I honestly don't pay attention to how much the $$ is to repair.

Thanks for bringing this up. Food for thought.

[Vincent]

Teri wrote: "Reading your guys' stories about the flooding, infrastructure, etc., it came to mind that I personally don't pay attention to whether those taxes ever get increased. Surely as time goes by, the cos..."

the costs only go up if you do the repair - no repair = no cost
the failure to raise the gasoline tax for a long time and the greater fuel efficiency has curtailed part of the highway funding over the decades

[Francie]

Mary wrote: "Hmmm. I had posted twice in this thread but apparently need to add more. Here goes.

"If the Federal Government continues to centralize, we shall soon find that we have a vast bureaucratic governme..."

Mary, thanks for responding so well to all the questions. I tend to agree with you about education. I feel our educational system is lacking in so many ways. Teachers and students don't get much support. Could you expand a little bit more on your thoughts on education? Do you think that all states should be equal in what they teach?

[Mary]

Francie wrote: "If the Federal Government continues to centralize, we shall soon find that we have a vast bureaucr..."

Hello Francie - now you're putting me on the spot! I feel my thoughts about education aren't fully formed and I'm no expert on this topic, but have a vague idea that the US should have a stronger commitment to equality of opportunity, including giving every citizen a fundamental understanding of civics, history, math, and science. And how to think critically.

How to execute all of this - I'm not sure. I do feel badly for the teachers I know as they seem to be blamed for a lot of the problems in society and in school. In a perfect world, we would pay teachers a lot more to attract top achievers, and in turn get a populace that has more knowledge, more perspective, and more ability to withstand being manipulated.

In my perfect world, the US would spend less on being the world's policeman for so-called national interests, and spend more on education and infrastructure.

However, while I would wish that the federal government set standards raising educational attainment in the US, I am deeply suspicious about concentrating such power centrally, as it could become corrupted. I keep thinking that the people running the country benefit when a majority of the people care more about celebrity scandals than what is happening with our political and financial systems.

[Vincent]

Just a couple of comments about setting standards - in New York State we have the State Regents exams - at the high school level - necessary to pass several of them to get a New York State Regents diploma which has more weight than an academic diploma issued by a local school. The tests are given at at the same time on the same day all across the state (unless that has changed) so it is a level playing field to reduce possible cheating. It also shows which schools are not doing as well in educating and illustrates the achievable levels. NY State about 20 million people

In France they have the "Bac" - a national high school end level achievable diploma. This is a big hurdle that must be jumped to move on in education - most of the young French I have known who are college bound have been able to pass - but much anxiety and much work. France has about 66 million people.

We talk about needing more money for education or infrastructure but we are unwilling, nationally, to foot the tab it seems. Further complicated is that so much of school budgeting is done at the very local level (school districts - at least in CT & NY) and it is one of the few places people can actually say "no" and often do.

During some of our most prosperous years we had much higher tax rates. In 1955, during the prosperous Ike years, the top marginal federal rate was 91% - for income over $3,254,000 (inflation adjusted to 2010 dollars) for a married couple filing jointly- however the graduated rate did not even reach 26% for any part of income but just on the portion between $65,088 to $97,632 (1955 rates at 2010 values)- I do believe this was after allowance for dependents and other deductions.
Would it bother me for Bill Gates, Michael Bloomberg, Donald Trump etc to pay 91% on their income over $3.2 million? - I don;t think so - their properties get, buy virtue of their volume, get a lot more fire, police etc protection etc.
Given this scenery I would have lover to have paid 91% at any time in life or career.
At the same time the maximum corporate rate was 52%.

[Teri]

Vincent, do you think that people say no to tax hikes (local mainly) because it's just more money out of their pocket without really thinking about what that money goes for? As I've gotten older, I try and consider what the tax is for and how it is doled out. I don't know that people make that connection / do their homework on the proposal, which is sad. I think (and can certainly be wrong) that a lot of people don't get involved enough to know what they're voting for. They see the word "tax" and say no immediately.

[Mary]

Vincent wrote: "Just a couple of comments about setting standards - in New York State we have the State Regents exams - at the high school level - necessary to pass several of them to get a New York State Regents ..."

New Yorkers are some of the smartest people I know - and now I know why!

Vincent, I'm intrigued by your ideas about tax rates. I get that a person should be able to live comfortably on $3.2M a year, but on the other hand I wonder if a high tax rate would be destructive to innovation and job creation. Perhaps there should be a floor under the feet of every citizen to ensure a safe and dignified life, and then let the high achievers be free to earn as much as they can - as long as it's not done under rigged conditions.

[Vincent]

Teri wrote: "Vincent, do you think that people say no to tax hikes (local mainly) because it's just more money out of their pocket without really thinking about what that money goes for? As I've gotten older, I..."

Yup I think lots of people see school and town budgets as their only chance to say "NO!"

[Vincent]

Mary wrote: "Vincent wrote: "Just a couple of comments about setting standards - in New York State we have the State Regents exams - at the high school level - necessary to pass several of them to get a New Yor..."

Lots of growth in the 1950s

Do you think that Bill Gates, Thomas Watson, Steve Jobs etc. would have stopped trying to succeed more because taxes were higher?

High achievers can do that in education or government or other non profit generating fields -

Capital gains always had a lower tax rate too.

A floor for a safe life - yup - dignified is not so easy as people define that differently - but generally yes. That calls for lots of though to even try to present a way to go.

Countries that have succeeded have more homogenous polulations - similar racial and religious backgrounds (not so easy in a high volume long time immigration county like ours - with history of forced slavery by racial origin) such as France, Germany, Denmark, Finland Sweden etc.

[Mary]

Vincent wrote: "Do you think that Bill Gates, Thomas Watson, Steve Jobs etc. would have stopped trying to succeed more because taxes were higher?
..."

Interesting perspective. I wonder if countries like Germany, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, etc (social democracies) are successful because innovation often takes place elsewhere, and they just reap the benefits? When I look at lists of the most innovative companies (and no, I don't know how they define innovation) there are so many US companies. I also know many of these companies are global and get contributions from people all around the world, but still, I wonder if it takes a country rooted in inequality and competition to drive innovation. Gates, Watson, and Jobs are all Americans - is that just coincidence? If they had been born elsewhere, would they have been as fruitful? Does cradle-to-grave security dampen innovation or striving? I don't know. I would like to know your thoughts.

[Vincent]

Mary wrote: "Vincent wrote: "Do you think that Bill Gates, Thomas Watson, Steve Jobs etc. would have stopped trying to succeed more because taxes were higher?
..."

Interesting perspective. I wonder if countri..."

my thoughts - fast - OK so remember we are 320 million people

We are the descendants of people who had the courage and gumption to cross an ocean (no 6 hour flight back home) looking for a change to work for and build a better life - which reflects on how we were raised.

We did not get born into a place where all the land had been "taken/owned" for centuries - our antecedents and we could relatively inexpensively acquire some.Plus people did not have a class prejudice telling them they could/should not succeed.

I think this heritage and the passed down "ambition" is key to the US successes.

I chose those three as I know American succeeders by name. I could look but Mittal is a successful European (Indian born) steel guy active now in a seemingly less dynamic less sexy field.

[Michael]

For anyone interested in learning more about Belle La Follette, an influential reformer and suffragist in her own right, biographer Nancy C. Unger will be speaking about her on C-SPAN3, Saturday, May 07 9:00pm EDT.

Belle Case La Follette is a fascinating, under-appreciated pioneer of progressivism and women's rights, and Unger is an excellent speaker, so I'm sure it will be a very interesting talk.

by Nancy C. Unger (no picture)

[Betty]

Michael, thank you for posting this! How wonderful and interesting timing. I will definitely be watching :)

[Simonetta]

Michael wrote: "For anyone interested in learning more about Belle La Follette, an influential reformer and suffragist in her own right, biographer Nancy C. Unger will be speaking about her on C-S..."
Thank you for letting us know!

[Betty]

It was certainly interesting to learn about all of the wonderful causes that Belle La Follette was passionate about and fought for. I am amazed at her bravery, and surprised at how Bob encouraged her, and never asked her to "tone it down"! They had an exceptional relationship.

[Jill]

Ann wrote: "I would also like to say that I am appalled by the level of corruption described in the book. Perhaps I am very naive, but on the federal level at least, I think corruption is a bit more nuanced to..."

Reviewing the comments, Anne's struck a chord with me. I am from a state where corruption is widespread, driven by a cadre of men who controlled the state economy...they used to be called the "coal barons" who were just the "robber barons" by a different name. Unfortunately, what many people ignore at the state level extends to the federal government although it may not be quite as blatant, The use of lobbyists keeps the money men somewhat in the background while in the days of TR, the Rockefellers et al were much more in the spotlight. But we have to admit, that the system hasn't changed much!

[Savannah]

Jill wrote:"I am from a state where corruption is widespread, driven by a cadre of men who controlled the state economy...they used to be called the "coal barons" who were just the "robber barons" by a different name. "
What state is that? Perhaps West Virginia? I am originally from Louisiana. I think it is probably the most corrupt state in the union.

[Jill]

We are running a neck-in-neck battle with Louisiana, Savannah!!!

[Lewis]

1. a) Do you agree with the above statement? All of the time, some of the time or mostly never? Explain your position.

I believe we must compare today with a historical as well as global perspective. Yes, the government is much bigger today...but the overall quality of life, the roads, the education, the military...are at a much higher level than they were 100 years ago, for example.

b) Do you sometimes drive on your state's roads and bridges replete with potholes and wonder what your Senator or Congressman is doing about these road conditions in DC. Probably nothing because he is at the federal level - or are you interested in the infrastructure problems that cannot be fixed at the state level be mandated and rectified for the citizens of this country by the federal government? - for example, the lead pipes in Flint, Michigan?

I wouldn't want everything done by the federal government as the US is too big and too diverse to have a one size remedy for all needs. The reality is that some places will not get all the attention they need or want...part of the reality of a less than perfect society.

2. When things go wrong, do you think that your state has the ability to fix them? Do they have enough manpower, funds and other resources? What about when a big storm hits like Sandy or Katrina? Or do you think that the federal government should do something to fix the mess that your governor can or will not do? Or do you think that your state can only afford so much and if it did not get the help of the federal government many things would be swept under the carpet and ignored like the pipes in Flint, Michigan?

The federal gov. must be available for major emergencies or disasters. However, the more that can be handled by state govs., the better, I believe. Again, there will be times when somethings are not handled entirely to our liking.

3. Are you happy with your social security and medicare or medicaid or federal pensions? If so these are federal programs? Are you unhappy about the cost of prescription drugs and wish that the federal government would do more about it? Do you have children with special needs and have you found that your state and local government are not doing enough to educate and take care of your children and you think that the federal government should do more? Are you a college aged student or a parent of college aged students who are having problems affording to send your children to college or are you having a hard time trying to work, study or pay off big college loans? If so, do you think that the Federal government should be doing more? Do you think that Bernie Sanders is your candidate because he feels that college should be tuition free and students debt free or do you believe that Sanders has a great idea but what is his plan for paying for it. Do you think yourself a progressive, a liberal, a conservative, a moderate or an independent?

Our expectations are very high because we have become used to being very well taken care of. Compared side by side with other countries, I believe we do well. I used to think I was a Conservative, but now I don't know...probably fall between the cracks somewhere. Voted Bush, Obama, likely leaning Hillary...

4. Are you the type of individual who feels that you had to do it all on your own and there is no free lunch - so the federal government should stay out of your business and be "seen and not heard" at the state level. And that your state can take care of what it needs to take care of without the federal government butting in?

There are times when we need the fed. gov., such as with education, defense, and healthcare. We may think we did it all on our own, but the reality is that a stable society (thanks in large part to the gov.) has made our success possible. Try being successful in Cambodia, Chad, or Cameroun...best of luck.

[Vincent]

Lewis wrote: "1. a) Do you agree with the above statement? All of the time, some of the time or mostly never? Explain your position.

I believe we must compare today with a historical as well as global perspect..."


Just curious Lewis as to how your living in China might make your replies different than the rest of us.

I agree that we are very well taken care of - especially with a global view including say China & Syria - but a western European attitude might say something else.

I think that your perspective would be different than a person like me who has always lived in the States