equity_analyst Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dude, you don’t get it. > > Government can never create jobs. > > The money the government uses to fund a government > job opening comes from the people. > > 1. Nothing in our material world can come from > nowhere or go nowhere, nor can it be free: > everything in our economic life has a source, a > destination, and a cost that must be paid. Oh so defense spending does not create jobs? Where do you think companies like Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumann etc. get most of their profits from? What about spending on R&D? Do have any idea how many tech and biomedical companies grants from the Federal government have spawned?
marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > equity_analyst Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Dude, you don’t get it. > > > > Government can never create jobs. > > > > The money the government uses to fund a > government > > job opening comes from the people. > > > > 1. Nothing in our material world can come from > > nowhere or go nowhere, nor can it be free: > > everything in our economic life has a source, a > > destination, and a cost that must be paid. > > Oh so defense spending does not create jobs? Where > do you think companies like Lockheed Martin, > Northrup Grumann etc. get most of their profits > from? What about spending on R&D? Do have any idea > how many tech and biomedical companies grants from > the Federal government have spawned? so maybe we should all work for the government??? here’s a question: for every dollar spent, how much of that dollar lands back in the pocket of a job created by government? my bet is around $.05 or less.
mar350 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > marcus phoenix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > equity_analyst Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Dude, you don’t get it. > > > > > > Government can never create jobs. > > > > > > The money the government uses to fund a > > government > > > job opening comes from the people. > > > > > > 1. Nothing in our material world can come > from > > > nowhere or go nowhere, nor can it be free: > > > everything in our economic life has a source, > a > > > destination, and a cost that must be paid. > > > > Oh so defense spending does not create jobs? > Where > > do you think companies like Lockheed Martin, > > Northrup Grumann etc. get most of their profits > > from? What about spending on R&D? Do have any > idea > > how many tech and biomedical companies grants > from > > the Federal government have spawned? > > > so maybe we should all work for the government??? > > here’s a question: for every dollar spent, how > much of that dollar lands back in the pocket of a > job created by government? my bet is around $.05 > or less. Did Rand Paul tell you that?
marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do have any idea > how many tech and biomedical companies grants from > the Federal government have spawned? Do you? But anyway, I think people are missing the point of the article. It’s basically saying that in some cases, Obama made decisions that were unpopular but necessary to support the economy. Some of the supporting points are weak, but the thesis is valid. Another president probably would have made the same decisions, but that’s not really relevant. Yes, Obama made ideological decisions, particularly related to taxes and health insurance, that will hurt economic growth. However, did he generally take the right steps in response to the economic crisis? Even if some of these steps were no-brainers, the answer is still yes.
marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Fine. Vote for Sarah Palin next time…she looks > all set to run. She will probably get elected as > well, seeing the number of ignorant voters in our > country. > > You usually have pretty well thought out statements, but you’re watching way too much MSNBC if you think Sarah Palin has a snowball’s chance of receiving the GOP nomination. Olbermann and Maddow are nothing but liberal versions of Bill O’Reilly who want nothing more than to scare moderates into thinking that whack-jobs like Palin represent conservatives in this country. She does not. The GOP nod will go to Romney, Barbour, Pawlenty, or Gingrich.
higgmond Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > You usually have pretty well thought out > statements ???
ohai Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > marcus phoenix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Do have any idea > > how many tech and biomedical companies grants > from > > the Federal government have spawned? > > Do you? Yes…the list is way to long. And not just that you have no idea how much research money flows into top research schools including ivy league universities from the Federal Government. You think they can continue to be at the forefront of scientific progress purely on endowments and tuition fees?
higgmond Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > marcus phoenix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Fine. Vote for Sarah Palin next time…she > looks > > all set to run. She will probably get elected > as > > well, seeing the number of ignorant voters in > our > > country. > > > > > You usually have pretty well thought out > statements, but you’re watching way too much MSNBC > if you think Sarah Palin has a snowball’s chance > of receiving the GOP nomination. Olbermann and > Maddow are nothing but liberal versions of Bill > O’Reilly who want nothing more than to scare > moderates into thinking that whack-jobs like Palin > represent conservatives in this country. She does > not. The GOP nod will go to Romney, Barbour, > Pawlenty, or Gingrich. You never know anyways…I know for sure that Republicans will also be in control of the Senate by 2012. Do you really want control of all three branches in one party (Republicans) again? Anyways I was more in favor of Hillary as President merely for the fact she would have been more palatable for the average joe out there. USA for the most part is hardly “post racial” enough yet to accept a (half) black man in charge.
ohai Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > higgmond Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > You usually have pretty well thought out > > statements > > ??? Come on now. Marcus may be pretty liberal, but he at least puts some thought behind his statements most of the time and trys to have an honest dialogue. The same can’t be said for at least one other liberal on here and a few conservatives who basically resort to name calling. I disagree with Marcus most of the time, but welcome the chance to hear viewpoints other than my own and sometimes find that the bases for my opinions aren’t always as solid as I thought they were.
marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > You never know anyways…I know for sure that > Republicans will also be in control of the Senate > by 2012. Do you really want control of all three > branches in one party (Republicans) again? > Reagan, Clinton and GWB all lost Congress in the midterm election of their first terms and were re-elected, so don’t count Obama out just yet. While I would now welcome Change I can Believe In, if GWB could get re-elected, just about anybody can.
marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > equity_analyst Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Dude, you don’t get it. > > > > Government can never create jobs. > > > > The money the government uses to fund a > government > > job opening comes from the people. > > > > 1. Nothing in our material world can come from > > nowhere or go nowhere, nor can it be free: > > everything in our economic life has a source, a > > destination, and a cost that must be paid. > > Oh so defense spending does not create jobs? Where > do you think companies like Lockheed Martin, > Northrup Grumann etc. get most of their profits > from? What about spending on R&D? Do have any idea > how many tech and biomedical companies grants from > the Federal government have spawned? A good point and is one of my strongest criticisms of those who state government can’t do anything right. To gut government grants for to schools for research, NASA, A&D research, etc… would be a really bad idea. Govt. can focus on things that are longer term and don’t just focus completely on the bottom line. However, there needs to be more accountability for pork projects. Ex/ high speed rail. Love HSR, but won’t be practical in the US outside of possibly the NE b/c our population isn’t dense enough and distance between cities is too great. One big problem I see with govt. that was not there before is the rise of organized labor in the public domain.
marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Anyways I was more in favor of Hillary as > President merely for the fact she would have been > more palatable for the average joe out there. USA > for the most part is hardly “post racial” enough > yet to accept a (half) black man in charge. Between hillary and obama, I would have went with hillary as well. But let’s not get into the “racial” aspect. that almost tore to shreds another thread
Hmm. I always figured that Obama beating Hillary was indicative that Americans are more ready for a black president than a female president.
marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Did Rand Paul tell you that? way to not answer the question. did biden tell you that? please copy-paste another baseless article in an attempt to portray yourself as a political intellectual. please resort to name-calling, claims of racism, and changing the topic.
ohai Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > higgmond Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > You usually have pretty well thought out > > statements > > ??? x2
mar350 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > marcus phoenix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > equity_analyst Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > Dude, you don’t get it. > > > > > > Government can never create jobs. > > > > > > The money the government uses to fund a > > government > > > job opening comes from the people. > > > > > > 1. Nothing in our material world can come > from > > > nowhere or go nowhere, nor can it be free: > > > everything in our economic life has a source, > a > > > destination, and a cost that must be paid. > > > > Oh so defense spending does not create jobs? > Where > > do you think companies like Lockheed Martin, > > Northrup Grumann etc. get most of their profits > > from? What about spending on R&D? Do have any > idea > > how many tech and biomedical companies grants > from > > the Federal government have spawned? > > > so maybe we should all work for the government??? > > here’s a question: for every dollar spent, how > much of that dollar lands back in the pocket of a > job created by government? my bet is around $.05 > or less. Please refer to to understand how fiscal spending affects the broader economy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_multiplier Also, dont forget, in an environment of uncertainity and falling home prices, households scale back spending, which reduces economic growth. So to keep growth from sliding, temporarily the government has to be the spender of last resort. Not the ideal situation, and its not the whole story but definately a starting point.
mar350 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > marcus phoenix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Did Rand Paul tell you that? > > > way to not answer the question. did biden tell you > that? > > please copy-paste another baseless article in an > attempt to portray yourself as a political > intellectual. > > please resort to name-calling, claims of racism, > and changing the topic. Where is the name calling or racism here? Rand Paul is a pure libertarian…he has similar views about the role of government.
varang Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mar350 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > > here’s a question: for every dollar spent, how > > much of that dollar lands back in the pocket of > > a job created by government? my bet is around > > $.05 or less. > > Please refer to to understand how fiscal spending > affects the broader economy. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_multiplier i was referring to jobs created. this is the GDP multilier which is a gross economic measure.
marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Where is the name calling or racism here? > mar350 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > marcus phoenix Wrote: > > -------------------------------------------------- > > ----- > > > equity_analyst Wrote: > > Did Rand Paul tell you that? don’t infer that anyone tells me anything or attempt to label me through association. marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Where is the name calling or racism here? marcus phoenix Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > higgmond Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- >> > USA for the most part is hardly “post racial” enough > yet to accept a (half) black man in charge. does calling the US racist count as racism? you’re a child. i’m done here.
Obama isn’t the first president to make unpopular moves for the better good. GHW Bush went against his party and campaign promise to raise taxes. At the time he had to know that the move could very well kill his bid for a second term, which it did (that and Ross Perot which also had to do with his tax pledge), but still went ahead with it. He did it because he understood that deficits would serve as a drag on the economy and could very well spiral out of control. The move cost him his presidency but laid the groundwork for 8 years of economic growth and an eventual balanced budget.