Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by splendor_spoon | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

splendor_spoon

[flagged]

View on HN

Its "big government" shutting down unnecessary public spend?

Big government should not decide how public universities spend their money.

Who should decide how public universities spend taxpayer money?

Public universities. Who else is going to decide how they spend their money? They're part of the government.

> Public universities. Who else is going to decide how they spend their money? They're part of the government.

Small Government is as much about localism as it is about reducing the size of the government. So having a state-level legislature meddle in the inner workings of a university is absolutely Big Government.

This is a pointless discussion. Even if it is Big Government (debatable), thinking that you're going to "gotcha" Republicans on their hypocrisy will have about as much effect as Republicans saying "See, Democrats are the REAL racists" in response to some policy that ostensibly harms Black people.

This is a policy move designed to destroy a politically vulnerable patronage network on the other side. If the voters think this is bad policy they should vote in new politicians.

It's a state university. It's funded by the state. Of course the state government is going to have oversight.

If Austin wants the say in how a university is run, let Austin fund it.

> Small Government is as much about localism as it is about reducing the size of the government.

"Small Governments" have no rights outside of what the Federal and State constitutions give them. This is known as the Dillon Rule.

Localism also is debatable, since many of these big state Texas Unis are in big cities, e.g. U Texas is in the state capital of Austin -- right next to the state legislature. Other U T branch campuses are in other big cities but are ultimately part of the UT system.

Small government would not have public universities...

So maybe that would be first step for one.

If you poll the public where the public universities are located, e.g. the major metropolitan areas, you'll probably find the majority support progressive agenda.

Why poll when you could actually vote and elect! Oh they do.

Yes, and Texas governor is flexing his big government hands by imposing state laws on progressive institutions and local constituencies because there's an impasse over property tax legislation a.k.a dick measuring contest going on and he has to throw his hat in the ring, and he does not like progressives anyway.

Um.

Good or bad, how is getting rid of government employees/services "big government"?

Frank Wilhoit: “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

That's about as useful as saying Democrats sit on the left and Republicans on the right. It does not produce any understanding at all.

And for the record, you can substitute Conservatism for Progressivism and the statement would carry no less veracity, and the same utility.

> That's about as useful as saying Democrats sit on the left and Republicans on the right. It does not produce any understanding at all.

Then I think you misunderstand the quote. There is a very clear message in it.

> And for the record, you can substitute Conservatism for Progressivism and the statement would carry no less veracity, and the same utility.

No, you cannot. Progressivism is fundamentally based on moving towards equality, conservatism is not. This is why conservatism makes sense in the previous quote and progressivism doesn't.

Progressivism obsesses over equality of outcome. Conservatism obsesses over equality of opportunity. In this respect the two groups often strive to solve the same problems, but disagree on the cause, leading to fundamental disagreements over policy.

Progressives often demonize conservatives (the out-group to their in-group). This is why progressivism may be substituted in the quote.

> Progressivism obsesses over equality of outcome.

No, that is inaccurate. Progressivism works towards equality of opportunity.

> Conservatism obsesses over equality of opportunity.

No, that is inaccurate. Conservatism works towards inequality of opportunity.

> Progressives often demonize conservatives (the out-group to their in-group). This is why progressivism may be substituted in the quote.

And yet progressives fight for equality of conservatives, whereas conservatives fight for inequality of progressives. This is why you can't substitute progressivism in the quote.

This isn't the government telling a private institution what it can and can't do. This is the government deciding that it, the government, is no longer going to do something that it used to do. I struggle to see how you can label that "big government". (You can perhaps label it unwise, bigoted, a bunch of other things, but not big government.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com