Our Platform for Outlining Colorado’s Future

Website that agree http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/02/repealing-the-davis-bacon-act-would-save-taxpayers-$10-9-billion Reasons to agree : We are broke . Suspending the DBA means hiring five workers at market rates instead of hiring four workers at a 22 percent premium. If we have a limited amount of money, it is better to employ more construction workers than to pay a lot to the few that kiss up to their union bosses. We do have a limited amount of money. We can no longer pretend that we have an unlimited amount of money. We may want to give really high wages to give to everyone, but we shouldn't make rules that require the federal government to overpay their workers.  If Congress is not willing to reduce construction spending, suspending the DBA would make each public construction dollar go 9.9 percent further. This would create more bridges and buildings at the same cost to taxpayers. It would also employ 155,000 more construction workers.  The Davis–Bacon Act ...

  Reasons to agree : We are broke.  Federal jobs have typically had better benefits, but they did not make as much as private sector jobs. Even people who work for the government should acknowledge that our country is going to have a bad future, if our best and brightest work for the government.   With projections of huge federal deficits for years to come, policymakers should scour the budget looking for places to cut spending The OWS protest should look to government with anger at their compensation more so than looking at CEOs.  During the last decade, compensation of federal employees rose much faster than compensation of private-sector employees. The average federal civilian worker now earns twice as much in wages and benefits as the average worker in the U.S. private sector. A recent job-to-job comparison found that federal workers earned higher wages than did private-sector workers in four-fifths of the occupations examined. It is unfair to ask taxpa...

A picture says a thousand words. Why would we keep them out of a debate? Why not have the top 10 pictures that support AND oppose the same issue. Of course images are returned to Google based on an algorithm, images that have higher scores will contribute more power to the idea.

Reasons to agree : The federal government is too big.  Federal spending should not exceed 20% of GDP  (+5). Score : # of reasons to agree: 1 # of reasons to disagree: -0 # of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 0 # of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: - 0 Total Idea Score: 1 Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change

Reasons to agree : (+6) We should return federal programs to the states . Each state should be responsible for caring for their own uninsured . The way medicaid is ran now, it is a right. It is an entitlement. People are gauronteed medicaid, no matter what. People get medicaid, even if the cost doubles every year. With block grants, medical inflation can be limited, but putting a limit that each state gets from the federal program.  We can make it so each state that wants to increase the Medicaid benefit by $1, has to spend an extra dollar.  Score : # of reasons to agree: 3 # of reasons to disagree: -0 # of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 6 # of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: - 0 Total Idea Score: 10 Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change

Reasons to agree : The states are better at innovation than the federal government. The states are better at cost management than the federal government.  When each state has their own program efficiency is improved because people don't see it as free money from other states that they compete with. Each dollar is  valued  more.  The states are better at reduction of fraud than the federal government.  When each state has their own program fraud is reduced because the people running the program don't see it as free money from other states that they compete with. Each dollar is  valued  more.  The 10th amendment doesn't give the federal government the right to have social programs. The founding fathers did not like a very strong centralized power. They tried to prevent the type of government that we have become.  When each state has their own program efficiency is improved because those giving out the benefits are closer to ...

Reasons to agree : Government spending should be limited to essential programs The U.S. government should eliminate all non-essential spending. Test for necessity: "Is this program so critical that it is worth borrowing money to pay for it?" If a program is not essential to national security or economic prosperity, it should be cut. The U.S. has valid national interests America competes for resources, alliances, and global influence against regimes that oppose human rights and democracy. Supporting adversarial nations undermines U.S. values and strategic interests. Aid should align with American ideals, rewarding good behavior and discouraging bad behavior. The U.S. cannot afford unnecessary foreign aid The U.S. is trillions of dollars in debt, making it irresponsible to fund nations that do not support American goals. Prioritizing domestic economic stability is more important than financing adversaries. Aid to hostile nations strengthens opposition to the U.S. North Korea, f...