The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

[BassAle]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

That's not what you said in the original post I responded to. You said we couldn't cut 500,000 soldiers because of the economic consequences. Which is a valid point. But you don't then get to say we need to cut federal spending after arguing we need to save 500,000 military jobs.

don't you love it?

GOP: "The Government doesn't create jobs!!"

GOP: "Millitary spending creates jobs!!!"




If we admit that government spending creates jobs I would much rather spend money domestically than on operating foreign bases and dicking around in the middle east.

 

[joecct]

don't you love it?

GOP: "The Government doesn't create jobs!!"

GOP: "Millitary spending creates jobs!!!"




If we admit that government spending creates jobs I would much rather spend money domestically than on operating foreign bases and dicking around in the middle east.

You forgot NASA.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

don't you love it?

GOP: "The Government doesn't create jobs!!"

GOP: "Millitary spending creates jobs!!!"




If we admit that government spending creates jobs I would much rather spend money domestically than on operating foreign bases and dicking around in the middle east.

As I previously mentioned to unofan, despite wishes of department desirability, you're simply passing the buck from one department to another. Not a single government job creates revenue surplus. Let's start with a direct example, and say you pay a civil servant $50,000 per year to deliver the post. Sure, the worker may turn around in April and fork over about $7,000 of that to the government in the form of federal income taxes, but you've still lost $43,000 on that venture. Indirect investment isn't all that different, either. Let's say you spend $2,000,000 to have a road built by a contractor. Assume it takes one year to build it. Let's say they spend $900,000 on materials, hire 20 workers at $50,000 a pop, and expect to gain $100,000 in surplus. At the end of the day, you have a $900,000 asset (it's just materials sitting there shaped in a certain manner, so that's at least how much I'd pay for it at the time; practical usage would appreciate the asset), we'll assume any previous deductions have been accounted for with other projects so you receive $35,000 in business income taxes, and $140,000 in income taxes from the workers. You've just lost about $925,000.

I understand that some people have been arguing "jobs, jobs, jobs". I also understand that you can't have your cake and eat it, too. This is why I recommended that we look to engage the civil servants into the private sector so the government is able to obtain surplus. I also understand that there are other sales, usage, and ownership taxes that are applicable to result in the raising of funds. Once one understands that there is absolutely no fundamental difference whatsoever between a government and a business, one can begin to create a happy environment under a balanced budget.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Fishy, I always love seeing your "this is really a win for the Republicans" schtick.

can you tell me where you get your psychedelics from? it sounds like they are top-notch hallucinogens.

I never said what you cite me as saying; in fact, I rarely do. You consistently distort everything through some weird prism in which everything is about scoring political points.

I have no affiliation with either party; I am merely very much afraid of the current crop of progressives and their anti-democratic insistence that they know better than anyone else and that gives them the obligation to impose their views on everyone with however much force they deem is necessary. they are in their own way just as zealous and fanatical as any religious crusader I've ever seen. They will protect us from ourselves, and the more we protest, the more that emboldens them to become even more totalitarian.

I merely said "how is this a 'win' for the Democrats?" I never said it was a "win" for the Republicans.

You seem to treat this all like some big game. Have you no conception of the difference between real life and Madden 2013?

 

[LynahFan]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

As I previously mentioned to unofan, despite wishes of department desirability, you're simply passing the buck from one department to another. Not a single government job creates revenue surplus. Let's start with a direct example, and say you pay a civil servant $50,000 per year to deliver the post. Sure, the worker may turn around in April and fork over about $7,000 of that to the government in the form of federal income taxes, but you've still lost $43,000 on that venture. Indirect investment isn't all that different, either. Let's say you spend $2,000,000 to have a road built by a contractor. Assume it takes one year to build it. Let's say they spend $900,000 on materials, hire 20 workers at $50,000 a pop, and expect to gain $100,000 in surplus. At the end of the day, you have a $900,000 asset (it's just materials sitting there shaped in a certain manner, so that's at least how much I'd pay for it at the time; practical usage would appreciate the asset), we'll assume any previous deductions have been accounted for with other projects so you receive $35,000 in business income taxes, and $140,000 in income taxes from the workers. You've just lost about $925,000.

I understand that some people have been arguing "jobs, jobs, jobs". I also understand that you can't have your cake and eat it, too. This is why I recommended that we look to engage the civil servants into the private sector so the government is able to obtain surplus. I also understand that there are other sales, usage, and ownership taxes that are applicable to result in the raising of funds. Once one understands that there is absolutely no fundamental difference whatsoever between a government and a business, one can begin to create a happy environment under a balanced budget.

Your math is way too simple. A million dollar road can be a great "investment" if it provides access to areas where new private businesses can flourish, or for private homes to be built (wages for contractors, etc), or even just causes property values to increase. Those indirect effects far outweigh the simple direct effect you're focusing on.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

I have no affiliation with either party

I thought you said you were a Democrat, but with an "open mind" (who just happens to quote the editorial page of the WSJ and spew GOP talking points) and now you say you have no affiliation with either party. Maybe in a few more years you can come out of your closet and admit what we all know: You're a Republican.

See, I have no problem admitting I'm a Democrat. I'm a liberal. It isn't a dirty word. It doesn't mean under my hair you'll find a 666 birthmark (although some here might think it does). You can admit your affiliation. I promise no one here will ridicule you because you're a Republican. In fact you might find people respect you more for telling the truth than pretending to be something you're not.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Your math is way too simple. A million dollar road can be a great "investment" if it provides access to areas where new private businesses can flourish, or for private homes to be built (wages for contractors, etc), or even just causes property values to increase. Those indirect effects far outweigh the simple direct effect you're focusing on.

Hence why I said that practical usage would appreciate the asset, and also why I mentioned the usage and ownership (in this case, property) taxes. If those use and ownership taxes can pay for the cost of the road that you lost, not to mention the upkeep, you have yourself a good deal. If it's just going to be sitting there and not be used, similar to the high speed train that is proposed between middle-of-nowhere Nevada and middle-of-nowhere California instead of going between LA and Vegas, it's not worth any more than the materials used to build it. This is why I mentioned the existence of an asset.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

As I previously mentioned to unofan, despite wishes of department desirability, you're simply passing the buck from one department to another. Not a single government job creates revenue surplus. Let's start with a direct example, and say you pay a civil servant $50,000 per year to deliver the post. Sure, the worker may turn around in April and fork over about $7,000 of that to the government in the form of federal income taxes, but you've still lost $43,000 on that venture.

Aside from LynahFan's points below, I would also point out that the mail was picked up, sorted and delivered (usually in a days' time) for a full year. We've kind of lost touch with it in our Internet fueled world of instant gratification through emails, Twitter, video-conferencing and the like, but I can make my cousin Christmas fudge, put it in a box, take it to the Post Office and have it delivered a couple days later. That's still a pretty neat trick.

 

[unofan]

As I previously mentioned to unofan, despite wishes of department desirability, you're simply passing the buck from one department to another. Not a single government job creates revenue surplus. Let's start with a direct example, and say you pay a civil servant $50,000 per year to deliver the post. Sure, the worker may turn around in April and fork over about $7,000 of that to the government in the form of federal income taxes, but you've still lost $43,000 on that venture. Indirect investment isn't all that different, either. Let's say you spend $2,000,000 to have a road built by a contractor. Assume it takes one year to build it. Let's say they spend $900,000 on materials, hire 20 workers at $50,000 a pop, and expect to gain $100,000 in surplus. At the end of the day, you have a $900,000 asset (it's just materials sitting there shaped in a certain manner, so that's at least how much I'd pay for it at the time; practical usage would appreciate the asset), we'll assume any previous deductions have been accounted for with other projects so you receive $35,000 in business income taxes, and $140,000 in income taxes from the workers. You've just lost about $925,000.

I understand that some people have been arguing "jobs, jobs, jobs". I also understand that you can't have your cake and eat it, too. This is why I recommended that we look to engage the civil servants into the private sector so the government is able to obtain surplus. I also understand that there are other sales, usage, and ownership taxes that are applicable to result in the raising of funds. Once one understands that there is absolutely no fundamental difference whatsoever between a government and a business, one can begin to create a happy environment under a balanced budget.

Of course that million dollar road might facilitate 10 million or 100 million in commerce...

Also, the fact that you think there's no fundamental difference between government and business is very telling.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

I promise no one here will ridicule you because you're a Republican.

Thanks. I haven't had a good laugh in a few months.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

I'm pretty sure I earned this by paying taxes and premiums. I still pay taxes. How is money from granddaddy's investments "earned" but my disability insurance is "received"? What exactly did the person do to "earn" their money? Crawl out of the uterus? Win the sperm lottery?

still arguing with yourself i see......

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Of course that million dollar road might facilitate 10 million or 100 million in commerce...

Also, the fact that you think there's no fundamental difference between government and business is very telling.

I would like to ask you, then... What, in your belief, are the fundamental differences between a government and a business?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Aside from LynahFan's points below, I would also point out that the mail was picked up, sorted and delivered (usually in a days' time) for a full year. We've kind of lost touch with it in our Internet fueled world of instant gratification through emails, Twitter, video-conferencing and the like, but I can make my cousin Christmas fudge, put it in a box, take it to the Post Office and have it delivered a couple days later. That's still a pretty neat trick.

Funny, I can do the same thing with Federal Express.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Hence why I said that practical usage would appreciate the asset, and also why I mentioned the usage and ownership (in this case, property) taxes. If those use and ownership taxes can pay for the cost of the road that you lost, not to mention the upkeep, you have yourself a good deal. If it's just going to be sitting there and not be used, similar to the high speed train that is proposed between middle-of-nowhere Nevada and middle-of-nowhere California instead of going between LA and Vegas, it's not worth any more than the materials used to build it. This is why I mentioned the existence of an asset.

Can you tell me in which bill before Congress this mythical high speed rail from Nowhere, CA to East Bumphuck, NV was proposed? Or what cabinet secretary announced it was happening? The only thing I can find is a 2009 statement by Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood that the California high speed rail would connect Los Angeles and Las Vegas and speculation last summer that private investors were looking to build a high speed line from San Francisco to Las Vegas. The only place I see this other train mentioned is in the conspiracy blogosphere alongside such stories as the moon landings being faked and Jimmy Hoffa cruising around Lake Erie on a speedboat.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

still arguing with yourself i see......

No, I'm arguing with you, but I see you're easily confused. Have you had an MRI recently?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

I would like to ask you, then... What, in your belief, are the fundamental differences between a government and a business?

Just about everything. Only similarity I see is they both require money and people to run them.

 

[geezer]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Thanks. I haven't had a good laugh in a few months.

I know, I saw that. And coming from the second or third most excitable partisan hack we've got on here. What good would this forum be if not for ridiculing people?

 

[geezer]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

No, I'm arguing with you, but I see you're easily confused. Have you had an MRI recently?

I think what mookie was referring to was when you agreed with him that the Kennedy's didn't "earn" their money, but you did so in a belligerent tone that suggested you didn't at all realize you were both in full agreement. It was kind of bizarre.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

Funny, I can do the same thing with Federal Express.

You can't if you or your recipient live in a rural area or a military base overseas that isn't served by FedEx or UPS. And I forget, how much of a subsidy do UPS and FedEx get?

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 2nd Term - Round 1 - Diving for Dollars

I think what mookie was referring to was when you agreed with him that the Kennedy's didn't "earn" their money, but you did so in a belligerent tone that suggested you didn't at all realize you were both in full agreement. It was kind of bizarre.

Oh that's right I forgot. No one in the Kennedy family has served in public office or held an actual job. My mistake.