Brown: Stimulus Did Not Create One Job

[LilOlLady]

Healthcare is not dead. It's just sleeping and will be awaken. Too many people's lives depend on it and Democrates will deliver in spite of right wingnuts and village idiots. All they do is make lot of noise.

 

[Modbert]

We live in a world of unlimited demand. They'd find their niche somewhere.

Now how about a real answer? Last I checked, people aren't rushing to hire others.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

We live in a world of unlimited demand. They'd find their niche somewhere.

Now how about a real answer? Last I checked, people aren't rushing to hire others.

A real answer? You asked me a question I can't possibly answer. I don't know where all those soldiers would go for employment. Some may end up flipping burgers, others may start multi-billion dollar corporations. It's impossible to say where each individual would go. But we do live in a world of unlimited demand, so there's no reason why they wouldn't be able to find work. Yes, we're in a recession right now, but we won't be forever.

 

[Ravi]

Kev...we don't live in a perfect world and we never will. Your pipe dream is attractive but unsustainable.

Maybe things will be better in heaven.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Kev...we don't live in a perfect world and we never will. Your pipe dream is attractive but unsustainable.

Maybe things will be better in heaven.

I'm well aware. I'm simply attempting to make the point that we'd be better off economically if we didn't have to fund the military.

 

[Modbert]

A real answer? You asked me a question I can't possibly answer. I don't know where all those soldiers would go for employment. Some may end up flipping burgers, others may start multi-billion dollar corporations. It's impossible to say where each individual would go. But we do live in a world of unlimited demand, so there's no reason why they wouldn't be able to find work. Yes, we're in a recession right now, but we won't be forever.

I'm merely pointing out that in the short-term of things, the economy would be a train wreck of epic proportions. And that doesn't even consider the other couple million who are involved in military programs such as airplanes, weaponry, etc.

We won't be in this current recession forever, however, the number of jobs loss after due to that would be staggering.

I'm merely playing devil's advocate as I am a person who is for cutting the defense budget where it's unnecessary, getting rid of some bases, etc.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Not economically.

Tell that to the thousands if not millions of people who have jobs in various industries due to the military.

Never mind the million+ people who have a job defending this country.

You can say the same thing about the government bureaucrats who get paid by the government. It doesn't matter what you do, the public sector doesn't produce wealth because it requires taking money out of the private sector to fund it. We would all be better off economically if we didn't have to fund our armed forces at all and all of the bases around the world. Now you can make the argument that our defense is worth it, and I wouldn't argue the point, but the military is not a wealth producing job.

One person in the private sector takes money from someone else in the private sector. Most of the market is exchange, not creation.


Merely repeating your conclusion isn't a rebuttal.


Why are you so dishonest?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I would hope you're not saying we should rely on private industry for our defenses. Because that would just be really stupid.

That's not what I'm saying at all, I'm not an anarcho-capitalist. But the nature of economics doesn't change just because it's the military we're discussing. If we didn't have to have a military or anything we'd be much better off economically, that's just a simple fact. Public sector employment doesn't create real wealth, and that includes the military.

If we didn't have a military we'd still belong to England, be speaking German or all be Communist.

You really aren't thinking this through.

You do realize we live in a socialist society, right?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

We live in a world of unlimited demand.

Wow... I never thought anyone could so completely fail to understand the concept of 'demand'.

 

[LilOlLady]

Stimulus money is creating and saving jobs all across the country. Brown is a bald faced liar and if you tell someone something often enough they began to believe. It is working to build medical clininc and repair intrascructure, education, and jobs are created and saved

FEDERAL STIMULUS FUNDS: Nevada's per person share low - News ...Feb 23, 2009 ... Another major piece of the stimulus is money for transportation and other infrastructure projects, which can put people to work at the same ...
FEDERAL STIMULUS FUNDS: Nevada's per person share low - News - ReviewJournal.com - Cached - Similar

Education stimulus funds for Nevada released - Monday, May 11 ...May 11, 2009 ... The U.S. Department of Education announced Monday that $265.7 million of stimulus money has been released to Nevada. ...
www.lasvegassun.com/.../federal-education-stimulus-funds-nevada-released/ - Cached

Nevada's Federal Stimulus Information Concerning Expenditure of Stimulus Funds. Your Money at Work - The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act · Nevada Information Related to the ...
Nevada's Federal Stimulus - Cached - Similar

Not a cure-all, but stimulus money helped Nevada – InformA new Making Work Pay tax credit of up to $400 for workers ($800 for couples) ... In Nevada, the federal money that was included in the stimulus also ...
No Results for .../Not a cure-all, but stimulus money helped Nevada – Inform - Cached

Stimulus Package Unemployment Benefits Update: Nevada to turn down ...Mar 6, 2009 ... Nevada stands to get hundreds of millions of dollars in stimulus money, but Governor Jim Gibbons says he will pass on some of it. ...
moderateinthemiddle.wordpress.com/.../stimulus-package-unemployment-benefits-update-nevada-to-turn-down-some-funding-tooms-... - Cached - Similar

Sierra Health to build new center with stimulus grant ...Jan 9, 2010 ... Nevada Health Centers is planning a dramatic expansion of its Carson City clinic with part of an $11.2 million stimulus grant. ... Sierra has four doctors, two physician's assistants and six medical assistants to provide ...
www.nevadaappeal.com/article/20100109/NEWS/100109595/.../rss - Cached

If you cannot see the stimulus money at work, it's because you do not want to see it.

There are those state who do not want the stimulus money to work and they are doing everything they can to make sure it does not work.

States mis-use stimulus money - US Message Board - Political ...‎ - 1 post - Nov 26, 2009

5 million jobs left the country. iIllegal aliens took million of jobs that American citizens should have. What Obama is dealing with now is the results of 8 years of Bush out of control spending and lost of jobs continued after he left office and went on an extended binge.

 

[LilOlLady]

in spite of right wingnuts and village idiots obama will not fail.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well government can't create jobs, so he's correct there.

If the government can't create jobs, why is there such a problem with pork barrel spending?

If the government can't create jobs, why do conservatives constantly complain that we have too many people working for the government?

If the government can't create jobs, what's going to happen with all those hospitals and schools we're building in Iraq? Won't anyone work there?

If the government can't create jobs, why does my town have a credit union for teachers? With people working in that credit union?

 

[PixieStix]

Obama pretty much created Browns current job didn't he?

Good point

 

[NYcarbineer]

Kev...we don't live in a perfect world and we never will. Your pipe dream is attractive but unsustainable.

Maybe things will be better in heaven.

I'm well aware. I'm simply attempting to make the point that we'd be better off economically if we didn't have to fund the military.

We'd also be better off economically if everything at the Walmart, magically, was free. What's your point, exactly?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well government can't create jobs, so he's correct there.

What?

Ever heard of public works programs?

What about everyone who works for the fed?

Being an adherent of the Austrian school I'm sure you'll be able to grasp the concept that government spending requires money to be taken out of the private sector which destroys jobs. So by "creating" jobs, the government is actually destroying real wealth creating jobs in the private sector. And since government "created" jobs do not help the economy or produce real wealth the government hasn't really created a job at all, just destroyed jobs.

That logic is fundamentally flawed. Essentially, all job creation requires investment, i.e., taking money from somewhere else. So by your model, private sector spending requires that money be taken from somewhere else in the private sector, which according to you would destroy jobs.

Secondly it is not accurate to say that government created jobs do not help the economy.

 

[SwingVoter]

Secondly it is not accurate to say that government created jobs do not help the economy.

yes it is

Clinton had outstanding economic performance, and cut fed workforce by 373,000, Bush stopped the cuts in 2001, and economic growth stagnated

fed workers are almost always financed with newly issued government bonds that compete with private sector attempts to raise capital

so the issue isn't just taxes, but share of capital raised by the government, particularly during recessions when business is most vulnerable

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Tell that to the thousands if not millions of people who have jobs in various industries due to the military.

Never mind the million+ people who have a job defending this country.

You can say the same thing about the government bureaucrats who get paid by the government. It doesn't matter what you do, the public sector doesn't produce wealth because it requires taking money out of the private sector to fund it. We would all be better off economically if we didn't have to fund our armed forces at all and all of the bases around the world. Now you can make the argument that our defense is worth it, and I wouldn't argue the point, but the military is not a wealth producing job.

One person in the private sector takes money from someone else in the private sector. Most of the market is exchange, not creation.


Merely repeating your conclusion isn't a rebuttal.


Why are you so dishonest?

I think the only dishonest thing between the two of us is you claiming to be an Austrian.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Kev...we don't live in a perfect world and we never will. Your pipe dream is attractive but unsustainable.

Maybe things will be better in heaven.

I'm well aware. I'm simply attempting to make the point that we'd be better off economically if we didn't have to fund the military.

We'd also be better off economically if everything at the Walmart, magically, was free. What's your point, exactly?

No we wouldn't. Because then Walmart wouldn't have anything and would ultimately go out of business depriving poor and middle class people of a cheap alternative to their higher prices competitors.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

What?

Ever heard of public works programs?

What about everyone who works for the fed?

Being an adherent of the Austrian school I'm sure you'll be able to grasp the concept that government spending requires money to be taken out of the private sector which destroys jobs. So by "creating" jobs, the government is actually destroying real wealth creating jobs in the private sector. And since government "created" jobs do not help the economy or produce real wealth the government hasn't really created a job at all, just destroyed jobs.

That logic is fundamentally flawed. Essentially, all job creation requires investment, i.e., taking money from somewhere else. So by your model, private sector spending requires that money be taken from somewhere else in the private sector, which according to you would destroy jobs.

Secondly it is not accurate to say that government created jobs do not help the economy.

Exchanging resources in the private sector is the market at work. The government taking money out of the private sector is wealth destruction.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I'm well aware. I'm simply attempting to make the point that we'd be better off economically if we didn't have to fund the military.

We'd also be better off economically if everything at the Walmart, magically, was free. What's your point, exactly?

No we wouldn't. Because then Walmart wouldn't have anything and would ultimately go out of business depriving poor and middle class people of a cheap alternative to their higher prices competitors.

If it were free, then it'd be the cheapest alternative possible. Anyone charging for the goods would be told to fuck off.


Are you really that dense?