repairing roads is difficult and less about money and more about the fact that you have to shut down an entire road.
.
renewable energy once again where are we going to put this? next to your house. and don't say something like the Sahara dessert because it be difficult to transport.
.
and the most controversial, we would have to raise taxes in order to feed them (america is in debt ffs), Americans refused/complained (about) free health care because they didn't want higher taxes.
We have spent trillions on renewable energy, particularly wind and solar farms. In almost every case the company went tango uniform in just a few years, defaulted on their loans, and the CEOs walked with a shit ton of free money.
Solyndra was probably the most reported, but was far from the only one.
Mostly actually because of history.
Historically governments were run by whoever could keep the best army in an area. And if you had a really great army, you could even expand your area. If your army wasn't good enough, someone with a better army might come and take your country from you. As a world we are fairly new to the idea that this isn't how things ought to be run.
Weapons of course are nessicary to keeping your army the best.
And bailouts. This is actually historically related. You see, maintaining the best military often meant keeping other nobles armies under yours. And this meant sometimes giving other nobles large amounts of wealth to keep them strong enough to maintain their armies so they keep maintaining your power.
Trickle down economics has also been endorsed by the rich and powerful who have helped keep the government stable in lack of bigger army control tactics. And the governments of the world want to continue to function, and lack of stability is a problem.
Meanwhile repairing roads is complicated. The short answer is that governments do actually repair roads when it is important that those roads work on a larger level. However it only really matters small scale if local roads go to hell.
Renewable energy is expensive, and wind is only sometimes cost effective. Also, people tend to hate windmills and solar panels going up in their area. And they have to go up near people because they require maintenance.
Feeding the homeless is almost never helpful to a government. From a government standpoint it's bad economics. Its spending resources without getting anything from it. Now, sometimes the government does actually feed the poor. This is done to prevent riots. No one wants to go the way of the last French king.
I'm not saying that this is the way things should be done, but it's not confusing why they are done this way.
.
renewable energy once again where are we going to put this? next to your house. and don't say something like the Sahara dessert because it be difficult to transport.
.
and the most controversial, we would have to raise taxes in order to feed them (america is in debt ffs), Americans refused/complained (about) free health care because they didn't want higher taxes.
Solyndra was probably the most reported, but was far from the only one.
That means a lot more energy is being used on a daily basis.
Historically governments were run by whoever could keep the best army in an area. And if you had a really great army, you could even expand your area. If your army wasn't good enough, someone with a better army might come and take your country from you. As a world we are fairly new to the idea that this isn't how things ought to be run.
Weapons of course are nessicary to keeping your army the best.
And bailouts. This is actually historically related. You see, maintaining the best military often meant keeping other nobles armies under yours. And this meant sometimes giving other nobles large amounts of wealth to keep them strong enough to maintain their armies so they keep maintaining your power.
Trickle down economics has also been endorsed by the rich and powerful who have helped keep the government stable in lack of bigger army control tactics. And the governments of the world want to continue to function, and lack of stability is a problem.
Renewable energy is expensive, and wind is only sometimes cost effective. Also, people tend to hate windmills and solar panels going up in their area. And they have to go up near people because they require maintenance.
Feeding the homeless is almost never helpful to a government. From a government standpoint it's bad economics. Its spending resources without getting anything from it. Now, sometimes the government does actually feed the poor. This is done to prevent riots. No one wants to go the way of the last French king.
I'm not saying that this is the way things should be done, but it's not confusing why they are done this way.