Cons say the government doesn't create jobs....

[rightwinger]

Federal employees do not make the same as their private sector contemporaries...as a rule, the make less

Unproductive employees are not promoted or given raises. Each employee is given an annual appraisal and must meet an acceptable level of performance

Building roads is in the constitution. Once again you obsess over the level of government...it is all still GOVERNMENT

The title of the thread is the GOVERNMENT does not create jobs

Nope... as a rule, they make more.. they do less... they have to really fuck up to get fired.

Building roads is NOT in the Constitution.

Government is not Government. There are distinct roles provided in the Constitution for federal government and states. It doesn't state there is no difference or it doesn't matter who does what. That's YOUR cockamamie idea and not in accordance with the Constitution which enumerates powers to the federal government and leaves everything else up to the states and people respectively.

Building roads is in the Constitution

Postal Clause - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Except there is nothing in there which gives federal government authority to build roads. This was for the purpose of establishing a postal communication service, building post offices, setting routes, etc.

From your link:
Thomas Jefferson feared that the postal service would become a source of patronage and a waste of money. Jefferson also expressed doubt at granting Congress the power to designate post roads, as he considered road building to be a state responsibility.

Again......who gives a fuck about the level of government. The interstate highway system was a major success

It is still GOVERNMENT creating jobs

 

[hangover]

The Government creates millions of jobs

2 million federal employees, state and local employees, policemen, firemen, teachers....

The entire defense industry is created by the governement

Who are then payed by the tax payer. Robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Yeah, like robbing the poor and the elderly to pay war machine contractors.

Which is the governments job.

That ideology is why cons should be kept out of power.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Why not?

If government can do some things more efficiently than individuals...why shouldn't they?

What exactly does the government do more efficiently?
They couldnt even protect gov workers private info.

Do you build and maintain your own roads?
Do you hire your own police protection?
Do you verify the safety of your drinking water, food and drugs?
Hire your own teachers?
Do you maintain your own legal system?

Many, many things are done better collectively than individually

A private company could do it for half the price.

Bull shit. Another BIG LIE by another partisan hack. Libertarians are no different than utopian socialists. That is fixated on an idea, a fantasy, devoid of any critical thought or pragmatism.

It is telling that you think liberty is a fantasy devoid of critical thought and pragmatism.

It's telling (as in you've posted a lie) that my comment had anything to do with liberty. The Libertarian ideal is critically thoughtless for it fails the test to deal with things sensibly and realistically in a way that is based on practical rather than theoretical considerations.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The Government creates millions of jobs

2 million federal employees, state and local employees, policemen, firemen, teachers....

The entire defense industry is created by the governement

Who are then payed by the tax payer. Robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Yeah, like robbing the poor and the elderly to pay war machine contractors.

Which is the governments job.

That ideology is why cons should be kept out of power.

So it's not the governments job to protect the country?
This is why liberals should be run out of the country on a rail.

 

[2aguy]

The Government creates millions of jobs

2 million federal employees, state and local employees, policemen, firemen, teachers....

The entire defense industry is created by the governement

No...those are expenses paid for by tax payers......

 

[hangover]

...Cons say Obama doesn't deserve credit for cutting unemployment in have, because the government can't create jobs.

But now Jeb Bush is promising to create 19 million jobs. And Trump is promising to create the most jobs of any previous POTUS.

Hypocrisy IS the GOP.

You are as usual, confused.

The government does NOT create jobs and both Bush and Trump would tell you that. If you had a functioning brain cell to your name, you'd know what they meant but you are an idiot so it has to be explained to you.

What they mean is to create an environment where private businesses can create jobs. Like reducing taxes, giving tax incentives, cutting regulations, and basically getting the goverent out if the way.

Another ignorant left wing nut thread killed. My job is done here.

Who created the millions of jobs in the defense department? Including the men and women in uniform?

Who created public school teaching and non-teaching jobs?

Who created the jobs in law enforcement?

Who created the jobs for every business that has business with the government?

They bought them with taxpayer dollars. Those kind of jobs don't help the economy nut ball.

Goddamn you're ignorant! FYI, America has a war based economy. Every time peace breaks out, we go into recession. If the government doesn't use up those bullets and bombs, all the war machine contractors go out of business.

 

[rightwinger]

The Government creates millions of jobs

2 million federal employees, state and local employees, policemen, firemen, teachers....

The entire defense industry is created by the governement

No...those are expenses paid for by tax payers......

The Government is created by We the People
By definition, it is the taxpayers

 

[Meathead]

It's telling (as in you've posted a lie) that my comment had anything to do with liberty. The Libertarian ideal is critically thoughtless for it fails the test to deal with things sensibly and realistically in a way that is based on practical rather than theoretical considerations.

No, where libertarianism falls short is that it does not jibe with your philosophy:

Libertarianism (Latin: liber, "free") is a political philosophy that upholds liberty as its principal objective. Libertarians seek to maximize autonomy and freedom of choice, emphasizing political freedom, voluntary association and the primacy of individual judgement.

It does not surprise me that you believe the above to be unrealistic or insensible. The eternally self-righteous are indeed dangerous when given the power to determine the fate of others. That has to be put in check.

 

[Meathead]

Goddamn you're ignorant! FYI, America has a war based economy. Every time peace breaks out, we go into recession. If the government doesn't use up those bullets and bombs, all the war machine contractors go out of business.

Wow, that theory makes Reagan look even better.

 

[Boss]

Again......who gives a fuck about the level of government. The interstate highway system was a major success

It is still GOVERNMENT creating jobs

Well I give a fuck because I think it's important and the Constitution set it up this way for a reason. If it's not important then we need to get rid of state governments, there is no need for them. It's a waste of our money to be funding state government AND federal government if it makes no difference who does what.

The interstate highway system required an act from Congress, it's an exception because we made it one. Since we elect Congress, we voted for this and agreed to it as a nation. It benefits us all because it allows interstate commerce which we all benefit from.

I've already stated the Government CAN create jobs, I've never claimed otherwise. Every job they create has to be paid for by the taxpayers. Private sector jobs are not. Almost every government job created eliminates possibility for a private sector job to be created to do the same thing.

Now going back to the State vs. Fed argument... I don't have a problem with the people and state of California building a four-lane paved highway to the nudist camp at the beach... if the people want that and vote for politicians who propose new taxes for that... fine with me! I just don't want to have to pay for it... you see, I have my own things I need to pay for and I'm never going to use the four-lane road to the nudist camp in Cali. I might want to build a bridge to the other side of the river so I don't have to drive 2 hours to work each day... I don't imagine the people of California want to help me pay for that and I wouldn't ask them to.

Why do liberals act like delinquent teenagers who've gotten a hold to Daddy's credit cards when it comes to the Federal government? Is there something in your stupid little brains that doesn't comprehend we have to pay for everything the government does for us because they have no tangible source of revenue other than our tax dollars?

 

[Boss]

Goddamn you're ignorant! FYI, America has a war based economy. Every time peace breaks out, we go into recession. If the government doesn't use up those bullets and bombs, all the war machine contractors go out of business.

Careful... you are revealing your true Communist intentions!

 

[rightwinger]

Again......who gives a fuck about the level of government. The interstate highway system was a major success

It is still GOVERNMENT creating jobs

Well I give a fuck because I think it's important and the Constitution set it up this way for a reason. If it's not important then we need to get rid of state governments, there is no need for them. It's a waste of our money to be funding state government AND federal government if it makes no difference who does what.

The interstate highway system required an act from Congress, it's an exception because we made it one. Since we elect Congress, we voted for this and agreed to it as a nation. It benefits us all because it allows interstate commerce which we all benefit from.

I've already stated the Government CAN create jobs, I've never claimed otherwise. Every job they create has to be paid for by the taxpayers. Private sector jobs are not. Almost every government job created eliminates possibility for a private sector job to be created to do the same thing.

Now going back to the State vs. Fed argument... I don't have a problem with the people and state of California building a four-lane paved highway to the nudist camp at the beach... if the people want that and vote for politicians who propose new taxes for that... fine with me! I just don't want to have to pay for it... you see, I have my own things I need to pay for and I'm never going to use the four-lane road to the nudist camp in Cali. I might want to build a bridge to the other side of the river so I don't have to drive 2 hours to work each day... I don't imagine the people of California want to help me pay for that and I wouldn't ask them to.

Why do liberals act like delinquent teenagers who've gotten a hold to Daddy's credit cards when it comes to the Federal government? Is there something in your stupid little brains that doesn't comprehend we have to pay for everything the government does for us because they have no tangible source of revenue other than our tax dollars?

Personally, I don't get all butt hurt over the level of Government that performs a function. Just determine where the function is most efficient and do it at that level.

Just because you do not benefit personally from a particular infrastructure does not mean you should not have to pay for it
A road, or bridge or dam on the other side of the country may not be doing you any good...but we, as a country benefit from having it

 

[Kosh]

Again......who gives a fuck about the level of government. The interstate highway system was a major success

It is still GOVERNMENT creating jobs

Well I give a fuck because I think it's important and the Constitution set it up this way for a reason. If it's not important then we need to get rid of state governments, there is no need for them. It's a waste of our money to be funding state government AND federal government if it makes no difference who does what.

The interstate highway system required an act from Congress, it's an exception because we made it one. Since we elect Congress, we voted for this and agreed to it as a nation. It benefits us all because it allows interstate commerce which we all benefit from.

I've already stated the Government CAN create jobs, I've never claimed otherwise. Every job they create has to be paid for by the taxpayers. Private sector jobs are not. Almost every government job created eliminates possibility for a private sector job to be created to do the same thing.

Now going back to the State vs. Fed argument... I don't have a problem with the people and state of California building a four-lane paved highway to the nudist camp at the beach... if the people want that and vote for politicians who propose new taxes for that... fine with me! I just don't want to have to pay for it... you see, I have my own things I need to pay for and I'm never going to use the four-lane road to the nudist camp in Cali. I might want to build a bridge to the other side of the river so I don't have to drive 2 hours to work each day... I don't imagine the people of California want to help me pay for that and I wouldn't ask them to.

Why do liberals act like delinquent teenagers who've gotten a hold to Daddy's credit cards when it comes to the Federal government? Is there something in your stupid little brains that doesn't comprehend we have to pay for everything the government does for us because they have no tangible source of revenue other than our tax dollars?

Personally, I don't get all butt hurt over the level of Government that performs a function. Just determine where the function is most efficient and do it at that level.

Just because you do not benefit personally from a particular infrastructure does not mean you should not have to pay for it
A road, or bridge or dam on the other side of the country may not be doing you any good...but we, as a country benefit from having it

Yet the far left continues to press the "New Deal" long after it was supposed to be "temporary"..

Then again the interstate system was designed to support the military industrial complex..

 

[Wry Catcher]

Why not?

If government can do some things more efficiently than individuals...why shouldn't they?

What exactly does the government do more efficiently?
They couldnt even protect gov workers private info.

Do you build and maintain your own roads?
Do you hire your own police protection?
Do you verify the safety of your drinking water, food and drugs?
Hire your own teachers?
Do you maintain your own legal system?

Many, many things are done better collectively than individually

A private company could do it for half the price.

Bull shit. Another BIG LIE by another partisan hack. Libertarians are no different than utopian socialists. That is fixated on an idea, a fantasy, devoid of any critical thought or pragmatism.

A lot of typing to say nothing.
Are you saying a private company would hand out bonuses even when the employees fail miserably?
Look at the IRS for a perfect example of this.
A private company needs to make a profit,the government doesnt give a shit if they exceed their budget.

The CEO Bankruptcy Bonus - WSJ

The Highest-Paid CEOs Are The Worst Performers New Study Says - Forbes

Highest-Paid at Companies That Lost Money CEOs - Bloomberg Best and Worst

Twinkie CEO Admits Company Took Employees Pensions and Put It Toward Executive Pay Alternet

I guess human nature trumps (LOL) your opinion, as do the facts noted in the links above (The Donald makes me laugh).

Your statement, "the government doesnt give a shit if they exceed their budget." is total bullshit, an agency of the government cannot spend more than their budget, when the budgetary authority gives an agency of government their annual budget they must comply. There is no mechanism to pay for services not in the budget.

This simple fact is this is why most government agencies have shrunk, they didn't have enough in the bank to pay for labor costs, and either reduced hours for personnel (but not the work load, in fact it increased) and/or let staff go.

Each manager puts in writing to the executive management staff their wish list, each year wishes are cut and managers must either seek grant money or cut programs.

I retired at the end of 2005; several times I was asked to come back to the agency from which I retired and supervise projects or units. The last time I worked in this capacity was 2011 and my how things had changed. Clerks were few and deputies needed to type their own reports, makes copies, maintain files and other routine work not normally expected of line law enforcement.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

What exactly does the government do more efficiently?
They couldnt even protect gov workers private info.

Do you build and maintain your own roads?
Do you hire your own police protection?
Do you verify the safety of your drinking water, food and drugs?
Hire your own teachers?
Do you maintain your own legal system?

Many, many things are done better collectively than individually

A private company could do it for half the price.

Bull shit. Another BIG LIE by another partisan hack. Libertarians are no different than utopian socialists. That is fixated on an idea, a fantasy, devoid of any critical thought or pragmatism.

A lot of typing to say nothing.
Are you saying a private company would hand out bonuses even when the employees fail miserably?
Look at the IRS for a perfect example of this.
A private company needs to make a profit,the government doesnt give a shit if they exceed their budget.

The CEO Bankruptcy Bonus - WSJ

The Highest-Paid CEOs Are The Worst Performers New Study Says - Forbes

Highest-Paid at Companies That Lost Money CEOs - Bloomberg Best and Worst

Twinkie CEO Admits Company Took Employees Pensions and Put It Toward Executive Pay Alternet

I guess human nature trumps (LOL) your opinion, as do the facts noted in the links above (The Donald makes me laugh).

Your statement, "the government doesnt give a shit if they exceed their budget." is total bullshit, an agency of the government cannot spend more than their budget, when the budgetary authority gives an agency of government their annual budget they must comply. There is no mechanism to pay for services not in the budget.

This simple fact is this is why most government agencies have shrunk, they didn't have enough in the bank to pay for labor costs, and either reduced hours for personnel (but not the work load, in fact it increased) and/or let staff go.

Each manager puts in writing to the executive management staff their wish list, each year wishes are cut and managers must either seek grant money or cut programs.

I retired at the end of 2005; several times I was asked to come back to the agency from which I retired and supervise projects or units. The last time I worked in this capacity was 2011 and my how things had changed. Clerks were few and deputies needed to type their own reports, makes copies, maintain files and other routine work not normally expected of line law enforcement.

You can get rid of a CEO that underperforms.

 

[Boss]

Personally, I don't get all butt hurt over the level of Government that performs a function. Just determine where the function is most efficient and do it at that level.

Just because you do not benefit personally from a particular infrastructure does not mean you should not have to pay for it
A road, or bridge or dam on the other side of the country may not be doing you any good...but we, as a country benefit from having it

Again, if we are to be The State of America, we need to dissolve state governments. No need in having both to do the same things. It's just a stupid waste... like having a Senate and House. We should get rid of one of them... I'll be liberal and go with getting rid of the Senate since we won't have states anymore.

A road, or bridge or dam on the other side of the country may not be doing you any good...but we, as a country benefit from having it.

You've been out in the sun too long, you're not making sense. How does the country benefit from a road in California? That's my whole point... we don't benefit from it, as a country or individuals. The people of California do... in fact, it's a pretty sweet deal for them, they get the road and all the benefits but someone else is paying for it!

 

[Wry Catcher]

...Cons say Obama doesn't deserve credit for cutting unemployment in have, because the government can't create jobs.

But now Jeb Bush is promising to create 19 million jobs. And Trump is promising to create the most jobs of any previous POTUS.

Hypocrisy IS the GOP.

What they are promoting is policies that encourage job creation in the private sector. Do try and keep up.

ummm, like shovel ready jobs? Renew, replace and rebuild bridges, highways, tunnels and public transportation systems? Or a policy of nation building again? Booooooo & Co sure created jobs by invading Iraq.

 

[rightwinger]

Personally, I don't get all butt hurt over the level of Government that performs a function. Just determine where the function is most efficient and do it at that level.

Just because you do not benefit personally from a particular infrastructure does not mean you should not have to pay for it
A road, or bridge or dam on the other side of the country may not be doing you any good...but we, as a country benefit from having it

Again, if we are to be The State of America, we need to dissolve state governments. No need in having both to do the same things. It's just a stupid waste... like having a Senate and House. We should get rid of one of them... I'll be liberal and go with getting rid of the Senate since we won't have states anymore.

A road, or bridge or dam on the other side of the country may not be doing you any good...but we, as a country benefit from having it.

You've been out in the sun too long, you're not making sense. How does the country benefit from a road in California? That's my whole point... we don't benefit from it, as a country or individuals. The people of California do... in fact, it's a pretty sweet deal for them, they get the road and all the benefits but someone else is paying for it!

A first class road system benefits all states. Business in your state may want to ship to businesses in California. Those roads may help you even if you do not realize it
Some states are not as wealthy as others. They may not be able to finance a major dam, bridge or tunnel without federal aid. We are a United States not just a bunch of states that are united.
Collectively, our country does better than a bunch of individual states existing on their own

 

[Wry Catcher]

Do you build and maintain your own roads?
Do you hire your own police protection?
Do you verify the safety of your drinking water, food and drugs?
Hire your own teachers?
Do you maintain your own legal system?

Many, many things are done better collectively than individually

A private company could do it for half the price.

Bull shit. Another BIG LIE by another partisan hack. Libertarians are no different than utopian socialists. That is fixated on an idea, a fantasy, devoid of any critical thought or pragmatism.

A lot of typing to say nothing.
Are you saying a private company would hand out bonuses even when the employees fail miserably?
Look at the IRS for a perfect example of this.
A private company needs to make a profit,the government doesnt give a shit if they exceed their budget.

The CEO Bankruptcy Bonus - WSJ

The Highest-Paid CEOs Are The Worst Performers New Study Says - Forbes

Highest-Paid at Companies That Lost Money CEOs - Bloomberg Best and Worst

Twinkie CEO Admits Company Took Employees Pensions and Put It Toward Executive Pay Alternet

I guess human nature trumps (LOL) your opinion, as do the facts noted in the links above (The Donald makes me laugh).

Your statement, "the government doesnt give a shit if they exceed their budget." is total bullshit, an agency of the government cannot spend more than their budget, when the budgetary authority gives an agency of government their annual budget they must comply. There is no mechanism to pay for services not in the budget.

This simple fact is this is why most government agencies have shrunk, they didn't have enough in the bank to pay for labor costs, and either reduced hours for personnel (but not the work load, in fact it increased) and/or let staff go.

Each manager puts in writing to the executive management staff their wish list, each year wishes are cut and managers must either seek grant money or cut programs.

I retired at the end of 2005; several times I was asked to come back to the agency from which I retired and supervise projects or units. The last time I worked in this capacity was 2011 and my how things had changed. Clerks were few and deputies needed to type their own reports, makes copies, maintain files and other routine work not normally expected of line law enforcement.

You can get rid of a CEO that underperforms.

Yep, and you can overpay the incompetent CEO who unperformed too.

 

[Boss]

Personally, I don't get all butt hurt over the level of Government that performs a function.

Well, it's not "butt hurt" at all... it's anger and resentment at abject morons who think like you.

Federal government was allowed to exist because it was enumerated a list of a few powers and everything else was delegated to the states and people to decide for themselves. At some point, morons decided the "general welfare" and "commerce clause" was intended to allow government free reign to do any damn thing it pleased without regard for the states and people.

Now we are inundated with idiots like you who've had the federal teat in your mouth all your life and don't know what you'd do without it. While the rest of us are busting our asses trying to keep our heads above water, pay our taxes and keep our kids clothed, fed and properly educated... you're out there dreaming up new Utopian fantasies about what MORE federal tax money can be blown on.