Krugman's big argument about government jobs:

[The Rabbi]

It's pretty simple. Which is why the leftist can't get it.
You are a shoemaker by trade. But you cannot make a living without the tools, equipment, location, advertising budget etc etc that you need.
I am an entrepreneur. I can supply money.
I hire you for X amount. I supply equipment, supplies, etc etc. You repair shoes for a set amount and when business is good I make a profit. From that profit I hire another shoemaker and earn even more, even while paying 2 salaries instead of one. Customers get a quality shoe repair job, so keep coming back.
We buy leather, needles, shoelaces, etc and keep lots of other people employed. Customers willingly give us money and we provide a needed service that saves them money on buying new shoes.
This can continue indefinitely. Along the way everyone pays taxes, so gov't benefits.

VS.

You are a budget analyst by training. I am a bureaucrat. I hire you at a specific wage to work in my dept. You get paid out of tax receipts paid by people in the private sector. While your job might be vital, no one is paying you directly, and no one gets much of value back directly. No one chooses to do business with you. You produce no profit. And our bureau does not pay taxes on its own. The arrangement lasts only as long as tax revenues can continue to fund your salary.

So we see that gov't jobs are not sustainable jobs. They last only as long as there is revenue coming to the gov't.

 

[edthecynic]

yes, some government jobs are necessary, but generally they pay double what private sector jobs pay, and are not innovative just bureaucratic, so should always be reduced to the the maximum extent possible.

That is debunked CON$ervoFascist bullshit parroted only by fools. The people who deceived you took white collar government jobs and dishonestly compared them to the average of mostly lower paying blue collar and typically higher paying white collar private sector jobs combined. When comparing the SAME jobs, public sector jobs payed the same or LESS than private sector jobs.

Federal benefits drove the swing higher versus the private sector. The average benefits package for federal workers, including health and retirement benefits, costs taxpayers a whopping 48% more on average than what private sector workers get in comparable jobs, the CBO study says.

The CBO study relied on analysis from economists at Harvard University and Princeton University, Boston College, and economic research shops from both sides of the political aisle, the conservative Heritage Foundation and the liberal Economic Policy Institute.

Link please. History has taught me that no CON$ervoFascist ever quotes anything accurately, let alone paraphrases anything accurately.

 

[edthecynic]

It's pretty simple. Which is why the leftist can't get it.
You are a shoemaker by trade. But you cannot make a living without the tools, equipment, location, advertising budget etc etc that you need.
I am an entrepreneur. I can supply money.
I hire you for X amount. I supply equipment, supplies, etc etc. You repair shoes for a set amount and when business is good I make a profit. From that profit I hire another shoemaker and earn even more, even while paying 2 salaries instead of one. Customers get a quality shoe repair job, so keep coming back.
We buy leather, needles, shoelaces, etc and keep lots of other people employed. Customers willingly give us money and we provide a needed service that saves them money on buying new shoes.
This can continue indefinitely. Along the way everyone pays taxes, so gov't benefits.

VS.

You are a budget analyst by training. I am a bureaucrat. I hire you at a specific wage to work in my dept. You get paid out of tax receipts paid by people in the private sector. While your job might be vital, no one is paying you directly, and no one gets much of value back directly. No one chooses to do business with you. You produce no profit. And our bureau does not pay taxes on its own. The arrangement lasts only as long as tax revenues can continue to fund your salary.

So we see that gov't jobs are not sustainable jobs. They last only as long as there is revenue coming to the gov't.

Oh bullshit. If the budget analyst didn't save the bureaucrat money they wouldn't have been hired in the first place. You do know that the private sector hires budget analysts also, don't you?

 

[The Rabbi]

It's pretty simple. Which is why the leftist can't get it.
You are a shoemaker by trade. But you cannot make a living without the tools, equipment, location, advertising budget etc etc that you need.
I am an entrepreneur. I can supply money.
I hire you for X amount. I supply equipment, supplies, etc etc. You repair shoes for a set amount and when business is good I make a profit. From that profit I hire another shoemaker and earn even more, even while paying 2 salaries instead of one. Customers get a quality shoe repair job, so keep coming back.
We buy leather, needles, shoelaces, etc and keep lots of other people employed. Customers willingly give us money and we provide a needed service that saves them money on buying new shoes.
This can continue indefinitely. Along the way everyone pays taxes, so gov't benefits.

VS.

You are a budget analyst by training. I am a bureaucrat. I hire you at a specific wage to work in my dept. You get paid out of tax receipts paid by people in the private sector. While your job might be vital, no one is paying you directly, and no one gets much of value back directly. No one chooses to do business with you. You produce no profit. And our bureau does not pay taxes on its own. The arrangement lasts only as long as tax revenues can continue to fund your salary.

So we see that gov't jobs are not sustainable jobs. They last only as long as there is revenue coming to the gov't.

Oh bullshit. If the budget analyst didn't save the bureaucrat money they wouldn't have been hired in the first place. You do know that the private sector hires budget analysts also, don't you?

Right over your head, asswipe. What a shock.

 

[Rozman]

How do we pay for these "jobs"?
We raise taxes on people so.....they now have less money...
We then give it to government to hire people...

Or we borrow money to hire people.
Or we print money to hire people....

Does anyone see a problem here....

Why can't the focus be on getting "real jobs"....

 

[Skull Pilot]

Because republican cuts to police

I used to live in the city and my home was burglarized twice.

The fucking cops didn't stop the crime and never caught the guys. Seems to me we could cut a few doughnut eaters from the payroll and not even notice.

Then your house will be robbed 20 times instead of 2.

prove it

I'm more of the mind it was the big dog I bought and the window stickers from the alarm company that deterred future break ins

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I used to live in the city and my home was burglarized twice.

The fucking cops didn't stop the crime and never caught the guys. Seems to me we could cut a few doughnut eaters from the payroll and not even notice.

Then your house will be robbed 20 times instead of 2.

prove it

I'm more of the mind it was the big dog I bought and the window stickers from the alarm company that deterred future break ins

is there really anyone who thinks government workers with their unions, benefits, job security, monopoly and high pay are going to do a better, cheaper job than private workers who have none of that.

There is no other word for liberals than , dumb, I'm sorry to say.

 

[KissMy]

Bush increased the size of government & increased government pay drastically yet education fell & bridges fell down. Overpaid government employees are absolutely worthless. They need to compete with the private sector so they will actually do their job instead of just collecting a check.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Bush increased the size of government & increased government pay drastically yet education fell & bridges fell down. Overpaid government employees are absolutely worthless. They need to compete with the private sector so they will actually do their job instead of just collecting a check.

if liberal government workers did well the USSR would have done well?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The military and the police protect your right to private ownership of property.

yes, some government jobs are necessary, but generally they pay double what private sector jobs pay, and are not innovative just bureaucratic, so should always be reduced to the the maximum extent possible.

That is debunked CON$ervoFascist bullshit parroted only by fools. The people who deceived you took white collar government jobs and dishonestly compared them to the average of mostly lower paying blue collar and typically higher paying white collar private sector jobs combined. When comparing the SAME jobs, public sector jobs payed the same or LESS than private sector jobs.

That's a lie even without counting the million of dollars each private sector employee would have to have in a retirement account to match the union retirement pension

 

[edthecynic]

I used to live in the city and my home was burglarized twice.

The fucking cops didn't stop the crime and never caught the guys. Seems to me we could cut a few doughnut eaters from the payroll and not even notice.

Then your house will be robbed 20 times instead of 2.

prove it

I'm more of the mind it was the big dog I bought and the window stickers from the alarm company that deterred future break ins

Sure tell yourself that!

If there were no police to arrest the perps, no courts to try the perps and no penal institutions to keep the perps do you really think the perps would give your dog or stickers a second thought?

 

[edthecynic]

yes, some government jobs are necessary, but generally they pay double what private sector jobs pay, and are not innovative just bureaucratic, so should always be reduced to the the maximum extent possible.

That is debunked CON$ervoFascist bullshit parroted only by fools. The people who deceived you took white collar government jobs and dishonestly compared them to the average of mostly lower paying blue collar and typically higher paying white collar private sector jobs combined. When comparing the SAME jobs, public sector jobs payed the same or LESS than private sector jobs.

That's a lie even without counting the million of dollars each private sector employee would have to have in a retirement account to match the union retirement pension

Thank you for proving me right yet again.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Then your house will be robbed 20 times instead of 2.

prove it

I'm more of the mind it was the big dog I bought and the window stickers from the alarm company that deterred future break ins

Sure tell yourself that!

If there were no police to arrest the perps, no courts to try the perps and no penal institutions to keep the perps do you really think the perps would give your dog or stickers a second thought?

where people are armed crime is actually lower. If only police have guns then a crook has to avoid only police to be a crook .

 

[The Rabbi]

prove it

I'm more of the mind it was the big dog I bought and the window stickers from the alarm company that deterred future break ins

Sure tell yourself that!

If there were no police to arrest the perps, no courts to try the perps and no penal institutions to keep the perps do you really think the perps would give your dog or stickers a second thought?

where people are armed crime is actually lower. If only police have guns then a crook has to avoid only police to be a crook .

To liberals every gov't employee is a cop, fireman or teacher.

 

[Rshermr]

Great, ed.
Your making the accusation that are untrue. So, if you think I am lying, please show me the evidence, since it is you who is making the accusation.

Please prove to me that public jobs pay twice as much as (i assume you mean) comparable private jobs.

Of course, you can not. Just more drivel from the head con liar.

 

[Rshermr]

prove it

I'm more of the mind it was the big dog I bought and the window stickers from the alarm company that deterred future break ins

Sure tell yourself that!

If there were no police to arrest the perps, no courts to try the perps and no penal institutions to keep the perps do you really think the perps would give your dog or stickers a second thought?

where people are armed crime is actually lower. If only police have guns then a crook has to avoid only police to be a crook .

Have some proof, ed? I bet not. Everything I have seen says guns tend to do nothing to prevent crime, but do lead to more gun deaths. Have some integrity, ed. back up your statement.

 

[Douger]

what are military jobs?

what are police jobs?


what are teaching jobs?

what are firefighter jobs?

What are postal jobs?


What are road maintainence jobs?

None of those are jobs that add to the bottom line.

Government jobs do not add to net tax revenue nor do they add to net GDP.

All the money spent by government employees belonged first to the private sector and was then taken from the private sector and given to public employees.

The net result in taxes and GDP would be the same if the private sector kept and spent saved or invested all that money.

In short government jobs do nothing for the economy.

The military and the police protect your right to private ownership of property. The Founding Fathers did not create anarchy, they created a government by and FOR the people!

Flag waving kills brain cells.
THE SUPERHIGHWAY FACTS
The military just makes sure your masters can travel the world stealing natural resources to sell you at an inflated price.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Then your house will be robbed 20 times instead of 2.

prove it

I'm more of the mind it was the big dog I bought and the window stickers from the alarm company that deterred future break ins

Sure tell yourself that!

If there were no police to arrest the perps, no courts to try the perps and no penal institutions to keep the perps do you really think the perps would give your dog or stickers a second thought?

Did you not read my first post.

They never caught the guys and I never got my stuff back.

So what in earth makes you think they would have stopped any future break ins or caught the guys who would have committed them?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Sure tell yourself that!

If there were no police to arrest the perps, no courts to try the perps and no penal institutions to keep the perps do you really think the perps would give your dog or stickers a second thought?

where people are armed crime is actually lower. If only police have guns then a crook has to avoid only police to be a crook .

Have some proof, ed? I bet not. Everything I have seen says guns tend to do nothing to prevent crime, but do lead to more gun deaths. Have some integrity, ed. back up your statement.

More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws, Third Edition (Studies in Law and Economics) [Paperback]
John R. Lott Jr. (Author)

 

[The Rabbi]

where people are armed crime is actually lower. If only police have guns then a crook has to avoid only police to be a crook .

Have some proof, ed? I bet not. Everything I have seen says guns tend to do nothing to prevent crime, but do lead to more gun deaths. Have some integrity, ed. back up your statement.

More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws, Third Edition (Studies in Law and Economics) [Paperback]
John R. Lott Jr. (Author)

You can also compare crime rates in states before and after they liberalized gun ownership. Crime rates never go up, pace the leftists, and they often decline.