Someone please explain Bachmann's "reasoning'?

[Dr.Drock]

Someone please explain Bachmann's "reasoning'?

I agree with you that Bachmann is nuts.


However I think your "reasoning" that cutting spending automatically means more unemployment is also nuts.

Want To Create Jobs? Cut Government Spending

 

[Sallow]

This is all you need to know about Bachmann..

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IcRguMhpQPQ]Annoying Orange - Excess Cabbage - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Wry Catcher]

Someone please explain Bachmann's "reasoning'?

I agree with you that Bachmann is nuts.


However I think your "reasoning" that cutting spending automatically means more unemployment is also nuts.

Want To Create Jobs? Cut Government Spending

Fair enough, I explained why cutting government means cutting employees which will increase the numbers of those on the UE Rolls. Explain where my reasoning is wrong.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Someone please explain Bachmann's "reasoning'?

I agree with you that Bachmann is nuts.


However I think your "reasoning" that cutting spending automatically means more unemployment is also nuts.

Want To Create Jobs? Cut Government Spending

Fair enough, I explained why cutting government means cutting employees which will increase the numbers of those on the UE Rolls. Explain where my reasoning is wrong.

Cutting spending with a corresponding tax cut takes money from an inefficient government and puts in into a much more efficient capitalistic economy, hence more jobs than gov't can provide with the same $ amount.

 

[Oddball]

Parasites like... the Department of Defense?

Nice strawman, dickweed.

I'm of course speaking of the parasites at the Departments of Education, Commerce, Labor, Energy, HHS & HUD, Fatherl...er...Homeland Security & TSA, CPB/PBS/NPR, BATF, DEA, ONDCP, and the rest of the Alphabet Soup Mafia.

But you already knew that, didn't you?

Now, where does the money to pay those stooges come from?.... Santa Claus?

Aren't you a libertarian Oddball? Why would you not want military might cut from the federal government? That would seem first and foremost wise in terms of fiscal responsibility, and in terms of federal government power.

You can make huge cuts in the military...That doesn't by extension make its personnel parasitic, as national defense is one of the legit functions of the feds.

That said, I would throw in the Euroweenies and Asians mooching off American military presence in their nations (Germany, Japan, South Korea, England), as a back-door way to prop up their welfare states, as parasites.

If that helps you any.

 

[FA_Q2]

Should government be cut?. Probably, but not in one drop of the axe and not across the board, Suggesting so is stupid and based on emotion.

And therein is you logical fallacy. That is not what has been called for. That is what will be snacted if the government in general comes up with the one thing that is worse than that: continued, unabaited increasing in spending.

No one wants cutting that has no thought in it. They want to see government shrunk incrementally and over a space of time so that jobs shed within the government are absorbed into the private sector. There, those jobs can create the wealth that makes them sustainable. In the government, those jobs are creating no wealth and are NOT sustainable without equal wealth created in the private sector. Had our government grown at a slightly smaller rate than the private sector then there would be no problem. Unfortunately, the government has outstripped that growth by leaps and bounds over the last century. The time to pay is coming...

Someone please explain Bachmann's "reasoning'?

I agree with you that Bachmann is nuts.


However I think your "reasoning" that cutting spending automatically means more unemployment is also nuts.

Want To Create Jobs? Cut Government Spending

Fair enough, I explained why cutting government means cutting employees which will increase the numbers of those on the UE Rolls. Explain where my reasoning is wrong.

I already gave you something but here is a link for it:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG3AKoL0vEs]The Broken Window Fallacy - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Lovebears65]

Cut a lot of the EPA , They want to control everything down to a puddle of water in your own driveway.. When can we just govern mostly ourselves and the government just be the back up and not everyone rely on the government for everything we do. Soon I wont be able to take a shit without calling the EPA first

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Bachmann attacked President Obama's speech yesterday and in part she proposed to “massively cut” government and to repeal “job killing regulations.’’

If the cost of government is largely the cost of salary and benefits, then cutting government means cutting jobs.

Cutting jobs increases unemployment, so, I conclude, cutting government is a "job killing" proposition.

In my thought process, these government employees have bills to pay, children to raise and whether they are productive in the eyes of some or not, they still pay taxes. In addition they buy things: pizzas and pies, shoes and socks, books and bagels.

How will increasing the unemployment numbers stimulate our economy?

I do not read minds, so I have no idea what Bachmann's reasoning is.

I would, however, like to ask you what yours is. I have been doing some serious reading about John Maynard Keynes in order to get a better idea what he believed, and to figure out why it doesn't work. My biggest surprise was learning how much I agree with the man, and how little his disciples actually follow his teachings.

Keynes clearly taught that deficits should be small and self limiting. He taught that tax cuts were better at balancing the budget than tax hikes. He taught that large structural deficits are bad for the economy, He taught that government spending to increase jobs should be timely, targeted, and temporary.

Why do you, who claim to be an adherent of Keynesian theory, ignore what he really believed? Why do you advocate doing the exact opposite of what Keynes believed, and the same thing that actually made the Depression longer.

Even Christine Romer's own worked proved that the way our government is spending makes things worse, why do you, personally, think that something that is proven to be the wrong way to go is going to make things better?

Now I have another question for you, why shouldn't Bachmann advocate for reducing government spending since the type of spending the government is doing makes thinks worse?

 

[Texanmike]

she is merely playing to her base

Do you understand the logic? I know you don't agree with it and I'm trying to have a legitimate discussion with you so please don't give me some "eternal truth rhetoric" as a response, I'm really curious if you acknowledge the logic behind it or if because someone who you don't like said it then it can't be true.

Mike

 

[RDD_1210]

Parasites like... the Department of Defense?

Nice strawman, dickweed.

I'm of course speaking of the parasites at the Departments of Education, Commerce, Labor, Energy, HHS & HUD, Fatherl...er...Homeland Security & TSA, CPB/PBS/NPR, BATF, DEA, ONDCP, and the rest of the Alphabet Soup Mafia.

But you already knew that, didn't you?

Now, where does the money to pay those stooges come from?.... Santa Claus?

Aren't you a libertarian Oddball? Why would you not want military might cut from the federal government? That would seem first and foremost wise in terms of fiscal responsibility, and in terms of federal government power.

Oddball is a Corporate stooge. He doesn't want Defense cut because there are way too many high $$ private contracts directly tied to military spending. His priorities aren't for smaller government, it's for bigger business.

 

[Oddball]

Been attending Sallow's hyperbole clinic, I see.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Nice strawman, dickweed.

I'm of course speaking of the parasites at the Departments of Education, Commerce, Labor, Energy, HHS & HUD, Fatherl...er...Homeland Security & TSA, CPB/PBS/NPR, BATF, DEA, ONDCP, and the rest of the Alphabet Soup Mafia.

But you already knew that, didn't you?

Now, where does the money to pay those stooges come from?.... Santa Claus?

Aren't you a libertarian Oddball? Why would you not want military might cut from the federal government? That would seem first and foremost wise in terms of fiscal responsibility, and in terms of federal government power.

Oddball is a Corporate stooge. He doesn't want Defense cut because there are way too many high $$ private contracts directly tied to military spending. His priorities aren't for smaller government, it's for bigger business.

I got a crazy idea, how about we go by what Oddball says rather than making a crazy prediction based on attempted mind-reading and hoping its right, sound good?

 

[RDD_1210]

Been attending Sallow's hyperbole clinic, I see.

Nope, just reading your posts.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Santa is oh so bountiful on the taxpayers dime.

What ever happened to that list that showed all the waste and the multiple Depts doing the same thing??

Get rid of the useless Depts and the Fed employees that work in em.

would you be saying this if you were one of the employees?......just askin....

 

[RDD_1210]

Aren't you a libertarian Oddball? Why would you not want military might cut from the federal government? That would seem first and foremost wise in terms of fiscal responsibility, and in terms of federal government power.

Oddball is a Corporate stooge. He doesn't want Defense cut because there are way too many high $$ private contracts directly tied to military spending. His priorities aren't for smaller government, it's for bigger business.

I got a crazy idea, how about we go by what Oddball says rather than making a crazy prediction based on mind-reading and hoping its right, sound good?

Deal. Hence why I made the statement that I made.

Facts is Oddball has a raging hard-on for big business and would support just about anything if it meant private business could make a buck off of it. He's made that crystal clear in multiple threads on this site.

 

[Oddball]

Aren't you a libertarian Oddball? Why would you not want military might cut from the federal government? That would seem first and foremost wise in terms of fiscal responsibility, and in terms of federal government power.

Oddball is a Corporate stooge. He doesn't want Defense cut because there are way too many high $$ private contracts directly tied to military spending. His priorities aren't for smaller government, it's for bigger business.

I got a crazy idea, how about we go by what Oddball says rather than making a crazy prediction based on attempted mind-reading and hoping its right, sound good?

Don't mind him...He's still all butthurt from having his ass handed to him, when it was pointed out that so-called "net neutrality" is a corporate crony capitalist's wet dream come to life.

He now needs to take every opportunity to screech and project his deeply seeded corporatist proclivities upon everyone else.

 

[Texanmike]

Nice strawman, dickweed.

I'm of course speaking of the parasites at the Departments of Education, Commerce, Labor, Energy, HHS & HUD, Fatherl...er...Homeland Security & TSA, CPB/PBS/NPR, BATF, DEA, ONDCP, and the rest of the Alphabet Soup Mafia.

But you already knew that, didn't you?

Now, where does the money to pay those stooges come from?.... Santa Claus?

Aren't you a libertarian Oddball? Why would you not want military might cut from the federal government? That would seem first and foremost wise in terms of fiscal responsibility, and in terms of federal government power.

Oddball is a Corporate stooge. He doesn't want Defense cut because there are way too many high $$ private contracts directly tied to military spending. His priorities aren't for smaller government, it's for bigger business.

How do you know his motivation? It is incredibly arrogant and intellectually dishonest to assume that you are capable of divining his motivation. Its entirely possible that he sees national defense as a legitimate function of the federal government. Furthermore it is entirely possible that he disagrees with you about the appropriate use of the military in the defense of the country.

Another partisan argument in which you don't like what he says so you attack him and his motive in an attempt to discredit his argument.

For the record, I'm in favor of cutting the military and I'm a Libertarian but it does nobody any good to discuss things if they do so with your approach.



Mike

 

[Wry Catcher]

I agree with you that Bachmann is nuts.


However I think your "reasoning" that cutting spending automatically means more unemployment is also nuts.

Want To Create Jobs? Cut Government Spending

Fair enough, I explained why cutting government means cutting employees which will increase the numbers of those on the UE Rolls. Explain where my reasoning is wrong.

Cutting spending with a corresponding tax cut takes money from an inefficient government and puts in into a much more efficient capitalistic economy, hence more jobs than gov't can provide with the same $ amount.

That's at best a theory. Not all business thrives and even those that do, do not necessarily benefit local or even our national economy. A government worker spending his earned income on food, shelter and durable goods stimulates our economy; a South Asian or Chinese Worker doesn't spend their income in small business America.

A contractor hiring American workers building and repairing our infrastructure keeps money moving by buying supplies, renting heavy equipment and making things which benefit commerce.

Suggesting government is inefficient and proving government is so are two very different things. It's true that some of government largess is wasted, a good deal of that waste is the product of private sector greed, incompetence and thievery. Medicare fraud needs to be investigated and those who engage in white collar crime need to go to prison and make full and complete restitution.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Oddball is a Corporate stooge. He doesn't want Defense cut because there are way too many high $$ private contracts directly tied to military spending. His priorities aren't for smaller government, it's for bigger business.

I got a crazy idea, how about we go by what Oddball says rather than making a crazy prediction based on mind-reading and hoping its right, sound good?

Deal. Hence why I made the statement that I made.

Facts is Oddball has a raging hard-on for big business and would support just about anything if it meant private business could make a buck off of it. He's made that crystal clear in multiple threads on this site.

Ok great, then please provide a link to a quote from Oddball where you found that he doesn't want to cut defense because he loves high $$ private contracts.

If you can find that, I'll understand the crazy allegation about him.

 

[Oddball]

That's at best a theory. Not all business thrives and even those that do, do not necessarily benefit local or even our national economy. A government worker spending his earned income on food, shelter and durable goods stimulates our economy; a South Asian or Chinese Worker doesn't spend their income in small business America.

What's not theoretical is that if a business misallocates and wastes resources, they go out of business...Gubmint just says "Hey!..Ya fucked up, ya trusted us"...Then they set about to try and claim that their failures, somehow or another, exist as evidence that they need to be trusted again.

A contractor hiring American workers building and repairing our infrastructure keeps money moving by buying supplies, renting heavy equipment and making things which benefit commerce.

Opportunity Cost Definition

Suggesting government is inefficient and proving government is so are two very different things.

Aggression and compulsion are inefficient as a matter of course.