2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Please tell me you actually play Sim City...

Much like our government, I used the cheat codes when I played. I seem to recall that WEAKNESSPAYS allowed you to essentially "borrow" infinite money. Kind of like we do with China, but with 0% interest and with no chance of war since those "loans" never get called in.

 

[Twitch Boy]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Much like our government, I used the cheat codes when I played. I seem to recall that WEAKNESSPAYS allowed you to essentially "borrow" infinite money. Kind of like we do with China, but with 0% interest and with no chance of war since those "loans" never get called in.

FUND gave you a loan at something like 25% interest. If you did it a bunch of times the interest calculator would flip out and give you one at like -250%

 

[Rover]

How many people would have benefited from a "Bridge to Nowhere"? How many millions are served by the Hoover Dam? How many tens of millions are served by the highway system? Rural electricity? The Tennessee Valley Authority? The trick is to build things we actually need, not crap we will never use. That's why the theory that's become so popular among the right of using stimulus money to endlessly fill in potholes is so wrong. See, we use the highways and bridges. They get worn down. We have to fix them. If we don't, stuff like this happens:

Fortunately the roads, bridges and rails that make this country function are all superbly maintained so that will never happen...

I'm pretty sure tax cuts for the rich would have prevented this! Just don't ask me to explain how....

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

No, I don't play SimCity.

Does your RoI just take into account the expense of building something like the Hoover Dam, or all the economic activity created for the past 80 years by the dam project? All the electricity generated and used by the states of Nevada, California and Arizona? The tourism dollars? Etc...

It takes into account both. However, the original whining did include anything on RoI, just the existence of a job.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

FUND gave you a loan at something like 25% interest. If you did it a bunch of times the interest calculator would flip out and give you one at like -250%

Twice, and then grab a loan from the budget screen.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

I'm pretty sure tax cuts for the rich would have prevented this! Just don't ask me to explain how....

How the hell did we get on this tangent?! This wasn't even the original point. To think anyone has an issue with spending that provides a good and immediate RoI is insane. The whole point is that a job for the sake of a job (and given the person was asking a Congressional rep for a job, it would be public sector, meaning it's straight up expense with the RoI dependent upon the job) is dumb to ask for.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

How the hell did we get on this tangent?! This wasn't even the original point. To think anyone has an issue with spending that provides a good and immediate RoI is insane. The whole point is that a job for the sake of a job (and given the person was asking a Congressional rep for a job, it would be public sector, meaning it's straight up expense with the RoI dependent upon the job) is dumb to ask for.

You're the one going off on the tangent. As usual. My original post was asking where in the **** Bone Man's Jobs Bill was at. Then you started spouting off on your ROI vs. Jobs vs. Government needs to get out the way crap. I don't care if the bill is ROI focused, Out of the Way focused, or Jobs focused. I just want to know where the **** it is and why it's taking so ****ing long.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

You're the one going off on the tangent. As usual. My original post was asking where in the **** Bone Man's Jobs Bill was at. Then you started spouting off on your ROI vs. Jobs vs. Government needs to get out the way crap. I don't care if the bill is ROI focused, Out of the Way focused, or Jobs focused. I just want to know where the **** it is and why it's taking so ****ing long.

So you'd be satisfied with getting 50 people to build a Bridge to Nowhere just because it creates 50 jobs?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

So you'd be satisfied with getting 50 people to build a Bridge to Nowhere just because it creates 50 jobs?

If it meant that Bone Man actually did something meaningful for once than yes. Otherwise he is the biggest waste of spew ever to be Speaker of the House. It's quite an accomplishment for the US in this new century to already have had 1 of the 5 worst Presidents of all time and 1 of the 5 worst Speaker of the House's of all time. Quite a distinction. I guess we really are "circling the bowl".

 

[joecct]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

I like public works projects - especially when it's to build a new school, water lines, sewage lines, hospitals, roads, etc. But these are temporary jobs that last the life of the project.

I'd prefer the government to create a climate that allows the private sector to have the confidence to expand to create permanent jobs.

And now we may have a monkey wrench on immigration "reform". Rep. Stockman (R-TX) is claiming that the Senate bill contains revenue and / or spending provisions. Bills that contain that sort of stuff must rise first in the House. Therefore, Rep. Stockman contends, the Senate bill is unconstitutional.

Maybe, just maybe, the House can do it right and not expand the pool of low cost labor (keeping wages from rising for the poor and expanding profits).

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

If it meant that Bone Man actually did something meaningful for once than yes. Otherwise he is the biggest waste of spew ever to be Speaker of the House. It's quite an accomplishment for the US in this new century to already have had 1 of the 5 worst Presidents of all time and 1 of the 5 worst Speaker of the House's of all time. Quite a distinction. I guess we really are "circling the bowl".

If that's what you believe, so be it, but why don't you also consider the sample size. There was a time when Washington was the worst President of all time.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

I like public works projects - especially when it's to build a new school, water lines, sewage lines, hospitals, roads, etc. But these are temporary jobs that last the life of the project.

I'd prefer the government to create a climate that allows the private sector to have the confidence to expand to create permanent jobs.

And now we may have a monkey wrench on immigration "reform". Rep. Stockman (R-TX) is claiming that the Senate bill contains revenue and / or spending provisions. Bills that contain that sort of stuff must rise first in the House. Therefore, Rep. Stockman contends, the Senate bill is unconstitutional.

Maybe, just maybe, the House can do it right and not expand the pool of low cost labor (keeping wages from rising for the poor and expanding profits).

Spending provisions don't have to originate in the House. Revenue does.

 

[French Rage]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

If that's what you believe, so be it, but why don't you also consider the sample size. There was a time when Washington was the worst President of all time.

Nah, even then I'd have to give it to Elias Boudinot or Arthur Saint Clair.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Nah, even then I'd have to give it to Elias Boudinot or Arthur Saint Clair.

Then Peyton Randolph.

Dang ivy leaguers, usually I'm the only smartass in the group... -_-

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

I like public works projects - especially when it's to build a new school, water lines, sewage lines, hospitals, roads, etc. But these are temporary jobs that last the life of the project.

Not really.

If we build a road we not only create the temporary jobs needed to build the road, we make it possible for business to exist along the road. For example, 20 years ago the land about a mile from my house was woods. To relieve congestion on the main road we used tax money to build a bridge and a road. That road is used as a shortcut for tens of thousands of people each day. It has given rise to eight businesses (and one expanded), a golf course and about 100 homes in a retirement community. I wonder what the RoI is on that when you take into account the taxes paid by those businesses, the jobs created by those businesses, the expanded living space...not to mention the reduced energy used (and the traffic relief) of allowing those commuters to use a shorter route to work, shop, etc.

 

[geezer]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Not really.

If we build a road we not only create the temporary jobs needed to build the road, we make it possible for business to exist along the road. For example, 20 years ago the land about a mile from my house was woods. To relieve congestion on the main road we used tax money to build a bridge and a road. That road is used as a shortcut for tens of thousands of people each day. It has given rise to eight businesses (and one expanded), a golf course and about 100 homes in a retirement community. I wonder what the RoI is on that when you take into account the taxes paid by those businesses, the jobs created by those businesses, the expanded living space...not to mention the reduced energy used (and the traffic relief) of allowing those commuters to use a shorter route to work, shop, etc.

Not really.

If anything, those businesses, golf course, and retirement community were simply relocated from where they would have been along some other road. They don't exist simply because that particular road was built.
It's a common fallacy of central planners to think that nothing at all will be done unless they plan, initiate, or encourage it somehow. If anything, moving those businesses to the "shortcut" COST the previously existing gas station owners some of their profits as people started taking the shortcut. We should probably stop building new roads all over the place and make people go the long way.
plus, what about the spotted owls and tree frogs and whatnot and trees that once lived in those woods which are now paved over? Horrors!

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Not really.

If we build a road we not only create the temporary jobs needed to build the road, we make it possible for business to exist along the road. For example, 20 years ago the land about a mile from my house was woods. To relieve congestion on the main road we used tax money to build a bridge and a road. That road is used as a shortcut for tens of thousands of people each day. It has given rise to eight businesses (and one expanded), a golf course and about 100 homes in a retirement community. I wonder what the RoI is on that when you take into account the taxes paid by those businesses, the jobs created by those businesses, the expanded living space...not to mention the reduced energy used (and the traffic relief) of allowing those commuters to use a shorter route to work, shop, etc.

There's no guarantee that they move in, or that what you do has the desired effect, similar to the previously described "Bridge to Nowhere". Sure you can build the infrastructure, and assuming your town has corresponding laws you can allocate the land to a certain zoning (if it's to ease congestion I would assume it would be commercial), so the infrastructure creates opportunity, but it does not directly create jobs, with the exception of the jobs used to build it and any associated tasking that is required to maintain it (e.g. painting lines, inspection for cracks and potholes, traffic control, etc.). The government did not create the links and other businesses directly; that was still the private establishments. I do agree, however, that the tax money generated from the institution of the businesses makes for RoI on the opportunity created. We all need to make sure, though, that we don't get jobs and opportunities mixed up. Scooby's asking for straight up jobs. You're talking about opportunity, while under full understanding (I would certainly hope) that the infrastructure may not see any sort of return.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

Not really.

If anything, those businesses, golf course, and retirement community were simply relocated from where they would have been along some other road. They don't exist simply because that particular road was built.
It's a common fallacy of central planners to think that nothing at all will be done unless they plan, initiate, or encourage it somehow. If anything, moving those businesses to the "shortcut" COST the previously existing gas station owners some of their profits as people started taking the shortcut. We should probably stop building new roads all over the place and make people go the long way.
plus, what about the spotted owls and tree frogs and whatnot and trees that once lived in those woods which are now paved over? Horrors!

There's no guarantee that they move in, or that what you do has the desired effect, similar to the previously described "Bridge to Nowhere". Sure you can build the infrastructure, and assuming your town has corresponding laws you can allocate the land to a certain zoning (if it's to ease congestion I would assume it would be commercial), so the infrastructure creates opportunity, but it does not directly create jobs, with the exception of the jobs used to build it and any associated tasking that is required to maintain it (e.g. painting lines, inspection for cracks and potholes, traffic control, etc.). The government did not create the links and other businesses directly; that was still the private establishments. I do agree, however, that the tax money generated from the institution of the businesses makes for RoI on the opportunity created. We all need to make sure, though, that we don't get jobs and opportunities mixed up. Scooby's asking for straight up jobs. You're talking about opportunity, while under full understanding (I would certainly hope) that the infrastructure may not see any sort of return.

There was no golf course. Or houses. Or businesses, There was no place for them to go. It isn't simply a matter of they would have gone someplace else - there was no place else for them to go. Without that road those businesses would simply not exist. You can't just plop down 100 houses and a golf course in the middle of nowhere.

The town did not build any of the infrastructure. That was constructed by the businesses (possibly with the use of guaranteed loans) - which incidentally created more jobs. They aren't even government jobs! They're private sector! The bypass was built to ease traffic congestion, the added business activity along the route is gravy.

All that economic activity created by some government spending 20 years ago.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

There was no golf course. Or houses. Or businesses, There was no place for them to go. It isn't simply a matter of they would have gone someplace else - there was no place else for them to go. Without that road those businesses would simply not exist. You can't just plop down 100 houses and a golf course in the middle of nowhere.

The town did not build any of the infrastructure. That was constructed by the businesses (possibly with the use of guaranteed loans) - which incidentally created more jobs. They aren't even government jobs! They're private sector! The bypass was built to ease traffic congestion, the added business activity along the route is gravy.

All that economic activity created by some government spending 20 years ago.

Actually, they very well could have gone someplace else: to another town. Just because it didn't occur in your town doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. People move to take advantage of opportunities all the time. As with any transaction, including the building of infrastructure, you have to weigh the costs associated with the decision you make.

Perhaps we're spinning in circles over technicalities in wording, and if this bypass road was privately created without government request, then perhaps a trick was missed somewhere. The point is, and I believe we can both agree on this, is that government may spend to assist in the creation of opportunity. Whether people wish to take advantage of that opportunity is a completely different story.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2nd Term Part 4: Donkeys, Elephants, and Porcupines

I like public works projects - especially when it's to build a new school, water lines, sewage lines, hospitals, roads, etc. But these are temporary jobs that last the life of the project.

and meanwhile, the debt incurred to finance said projects will remain with us forever (every year we run a deficit means that all existing debt is rolled over AND new debt also is added on top).

When you factor in open-ended debt service costs, sometimes those projects are still a good deal, and other times they aren't. It's really hard to measure what else WON'T be done because that debt squeezed out another opportunity elsewhere.

My main complaint with federal public works projects is that if you do one, you have to do 50, or 100 or whatever, so that everyone gets their "piece of the pie."


(everyone wants "their" piece of the pie but no one wants to be the baker! )