I have a theory about people who "don't trust the govt."

[MikeWaters]

that they are among the least likely to join the PTA.

That is, they are among the least likely to pitch in for the common good.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

that they are among the least likely to join the PTA.

That is, they are among the least likely to pitch in for the common good.

As one who doesn't trust the government, I can partially agree with this.

I'm not a member of the PTA, but my wife has been and she decided that it was a waste of her time because, at the school in our area, the parents who demanded the most were least willing to do their part. Perhaps it's different in your area.

For us, private school has been the best thing for our children's education.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

that they are among the least likely to join the PTA.

That is, they are among the least likely to pitch in for the common good.

I believe 10% of the people (rich) pay well over 50% of the taxes. That isn't theory either.

Do you have a theory on how many of those that pay the bulk of the money to make the government work actually trust the government.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by BYU71

I believe 10% of the people (rich) pay well over 50% of the taxes. That isn't theory either.

Do you have a theory on how many of those that pay the bulk of the money to make the government work actually trust the government.

They don't trust the govt. They own the govt.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

that they are among the least likely to join the PTA.

That is, they are among the least likely to pitch in for the common good.

My family, I and my wife have served in all areas of the PTA, from the School Board President to all offices in the PTA. Having seen the politics of such stupid organizations and the pettiness has increased my distrust of governmental persons and functions.

The wealthy and upper middle class also pay a disproportionate share of governmental expenses while not receiving a proportionate share of benefits. No the wealthy and upper middle class shoulder the burdens of the poor.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by Archaea

My family, I and my wife have served in all areas of the PTA, from the School Board President to all offices in the PTA. Having seen the politics of such stupid organizations and the pettiness has increased my distrust of governmental persons and functions.

The wealthy and upper middle class also pay a disproportionate share of governmental expenses while not receiving a proportionate share of benefits. No the wealthy and upper middle class shoulder the burdens of the poor.

One of the reasons the upper and wealthy class is willing to pay for the poor is to keep them from revolting. Partly because it is fair, but their is a greater element in my humble opinion to keep them from revolting.

It is certainly human nature to see what someone else has and think they got it unfairly and it is your right to take it from them.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by BYU71

One of the reasons the upper and wealthy class is willing to pay for the poor is to keep them from revolting. Partly because it is fair, but their is a greater element in my humble opinion to keep them from revolting.

It is certainly human nature to see what someone else has and think they got it unfairly and it is your right to take it from them.

The more round and round I go, the less I know. No matter what the position you can find unhappiness.

My main beef with socialism is the appearance that those who make such propositions are usually the ones not impacted by the solutions.

So you have a bunch of social liberals earning 80 to 90 K, and they say here's a solution, tax those over 200K. How generous and how giving. IOW, none of the liberally minded social engineers are willing to bear the burden themselves but wish to foist it upon somebody else who didn't vote for that proposition. If the burden is to be shouldered, I'd wish those who make the proposal also carry the burden.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Archaea

The more round and round I go, the less I know. No matter what the position you can find unhappiness.

My main beef with socialism is the appearance that those who make such propositions are usually the ones not impacted by the solutions.

So you have a bunch of social liberals earning 80 to 90 K, and they say here's a solution, tax those over 200K. How generous and how giving. IOW, none of the liberally minded social engineers are willing to bear the burden themselves but wish to foist it upon somebody else who didn't vote for that proposition. If the burden is to be shouldered, I'd wish those who make the proposal also carry the burden.

Exactly. They need to put their money where their mouth is.

[MikeWaters]

What I am hearing is that some of you hate bureaucracies. Well, bureacracies are how big groups of people get things done.

Can't navigate the PTA? Heaven help you if you are a Bishop. Or a Stake President.

You all haven't discovered one of the secrets of life: the bureacracy is your friend, to be put into ACTION as YOUR tool. You all just haven't figured out how to do it.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

What I am hearing is that some of you hate bureaucracies. Well, bureacracies are how big groups of people get things done.

Can't navigate the PTA? Heaven help you if you are a Bishop. Or a Stake President.

You all haven't discovered one of the secrets of life: the bureacracy is your friend, to be put into ACTION as YOUR tool. You all just haven't figured out how to do it.

I've found that bureaucrats are not customer service friendly, nor do they want to be customer service friendly.