How big government helps the economy take off

[Anguille]

"Contrary to the romantic claims about the nation's laissez-faire past, American history is a story of government intervening, time and again, to support growth."

How big government helps the economy take off - The Boston Globe

And insightful read for those Americans ungrateful for what their country has done for them.

 

[Anguille]

20 views but no comments!!!?

 

[Skull Pilot]

When actually ranking economic freedom in high tax countries we see a lessening of the ten economic freedoms

The Heritage Foundation ranks countries in these ten freedoms and we see that the US ranks as 80.6% free placing us 5th in the world behind Hong Kong, Singapore, Ireland and Australia while Norway ranks as 69% free 56th in the world.

Personally I am of the belief that we have plenty of money to do everything mentioned in the Globe article. Infrastructure, etc without raising taxes. The key phrase in the article is

Rather than harm the economy, the evidence shows that government spending, when done well, contributes critically to economic

it's the when done well line that is the kicker. Government doesn't do anything well. the article also states that big government is a way of life and we should just accept it. if that is true then waste and corruption are also a way of life that we should accept.

To me freedom is more important and one is not free at all if he is not economically free. Instead of stepping on a path that will inevitably lessen our economic freedoms, we should be taking steps to be number one in the world in these freedoms.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I want to add a little more info the the above post:

How do the ten highest tax countries rank on the scale of economic freedoms?

10)Poland-43.7% 83 in the world

9)Finland-44.1% 16 in the world

8)Netherlands-44.4% 13 in the world

7)Italy-45.2 % 64 in the world

6)Sweden-47.9% 27 in the world

5)Austria-48.1% 30 in the world

4)France-50.2% 48 in the world

3)Hungary-51.0% 43 in the world

2)Germany-52.5% 23 in the world

1)Belgium-55.1%! 20 in the world

not a one in the top ten. So the question is again, what would you want bigger government or more freedom?

 

[Anguille]

it's the when done well line that is the kicker. Government doesn't do anything well. the article also states that big government is a way of life and we should just accept it. if that is true then waste and corruption are also a way of life that we should accept.

To me freedom is more important and one is not free at all if he is not economically free. Instead of stepping on a path that will inevitably lessen our economic freedoms, we should be taking steps to be number one in the world in these freedoms.

I agree that government spending must be done wisely but delegating too much to private enterprise has resulted in more paperwork and graft than savings. Government is not synonymous with waste and corruption as you suggest. Private enterprise is. Government is a democratic institution over which we exert a certain amount of control, depending on how vigilant we are. Private enterprise is feudal in nature. We need government to regulate it so it does not usurp our government and suppress our rights and freedoms.
Of course, one is not free if one is not economically free. Look at any low income person working two jobs to get by. If big business has it's way, we'll all be overworked and too tired to muster a whimper to protest our exploitation. Big Government means control is in the hands of the voters not the elite CEO class.

 

[Bern80]

I agree that government spending must be done wisely but delegating too much to private enterprise has resulted in more paperwork and graft than savings. Government is not synonymous with waste and corruption as you suggest. Private enterprise is. Government is a democratic institution over which we exert a certain amount of control, depending on how vigilant we are. Private enterprise is feudal in nature. We need government to regulate it so it does not usurp our government and suppress our rights and freedoms.

Nothing could be more inaccurate or more counterintuitive. Private business has a real incentive to curb wastefull spending, after all their purpose is to turn a profit. Private businesses are dedicated to the effort of not losing money. How you can make such an asanine statement with a straight face is pretty amazing. Government on the other hand has very little incentive to curb inefficienty and wastefull spending. Not until the voters decide to really start making them accountable anyway and so far history has shown that we won't. Government produces less paperwor? Have you seen our tax code lately?

Of course, one is not free if one is not economically free. Look at any low income person working two jobs to get by. If big business has it's way, we'll all be overworked and too tired to muster a whimper to protest our exploitation. Big Government means control is in the hands of the voters not the elite CEO class.

Since when can any business force you to work? You are confusing the term economic freedom quite a bit. I suggest reading Milton Frieman's "Freedom and Capitalism" for the correct definition of that term.

 

[Anguille]

Private businesses are dedicated to the effort of not losing money.

Except that they aren't.
As anyone who has worked in an inefficiently run and profitable enterprise knows.

 

[Anguille]

Since when can any business force you to work? You are confusing the term economic freedom quite a bit. I suggest reading Milton Frieman's "Freedom and Capitalism" for the correct definition of that term.

By owning all the work opportunities in an area, by striving to eliminate small businesss all the while claiming to be allied with small business. There are many ways.

 

[Bern80]

Except that they aren't.
As anyone who has worked in an inefficiently run and profitable enterprise knows.

It's pretty diffuclt to be both profitable and inefficient. To think that is the norm is not really accurate.

 

[Bern80]

By owning all the work opportunities in an area, by striving to eliminate small businesss all the while claiming to be allied with small business. There are many ways.

Again have you found this to be the norm? I suppose in some remote communities it could be that way. Even if they did it is a) still your choice to stay there and work for them and b) on the remote chance that such a monopoly on the job supply exists it does not inherently mean they are going to be unfair in their treatment of employees.

You're really starting to make things up for the sake of making your point. I assume you are referring to big box stores like Walmart, Home Depot etc., this is simply the nature of competition. By extension you are propsing that such big box businesses should not be allowed to be in the same area or somehow regulated to be 'fair' with the mom and pop places. How is limiting that choice as to where people can shop any different then the wrong that you claim in only haveing one company in control of jobs in an area?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I agree that government spending must be done wisely but delegating too much to private enterprise has resulted in more paperwork and graft than savings.

Are you going to support that statement or just let it stand?

In reality subcontracting is less expensive for the government than hiring employees for every little thing. By outsourcing, the employer does not have to pay not only employee salaries, benefits, sick time but all taxes associated with payroll and unemployment etc are eliminated. By subcontracting out the employer saves money and cuts down on paperwork.

Your answer to a government construction project is for the government to hire every person needed when in reality a small team of inspectors and engineers can oversee dozens of projects without the expense of a work force.

tell me which involves more paperwork? Running a company with 10,000 employees or running a company of 1000 employees that oversees subcontractors?

Government is not synonymous with waste and corruption as you suggest. Private enterprise is. Government is a democratic institution over which we exert a certain amount of control, depending on how vigilant we are.

The reality is that we as citizens don't have time to police every bill and every spending contract. the best we can do is try to vote out an incumbent every few years and we've seen how well that works.

And I will disagree with you and say the government IS waste and corruption personified.

Citizens Against Government Waste: Homepage

Private enterprise is feudal in nature. We need government to regulate it so it does not usurp our government and suppress our rights and freedoms.

OK explain that one. Private businesses do not have the power to usurp our freedoms. You have the right NOT to work for any company. Private business exists for one reason; to make a profit providing goods and/or services to the public. The public is free to choose what businesses to use and not to use.

Of course, one is not free if one is not economically free. Look at any low income person working two jobs to get by. If big business has it's way, we'll all be overworked and too tired to muster a whimper to protest our exploitation. Big Government means control is in the hands of the voters not the elite CEO class.

big government and total government control mean you will have less choice and less freedom. if you don't like who you work for you are free to leave find another job or start your own business and work for yourself.

And believe me we are not overworked in this country

Employment Situation Summary

In August, the average workweek for production and nonsupervisory workers
on private nonfarm payrolls remained at 33.7 hours, seasonally adjusted.
Both the manufacturing workweek, at 40.9 hours, and factory overtime, at
3.7 hours

you call 33.7 hours a week overworked?

 

[Anguille]

Look at what keeping health services outsourced has done to costs.
We lose money every time a corrupt or inefficient government contractor has to be bailed out or prosecuted.

 

[Anguille]

you call 33.7 hours a week overworked?

You're only talking about one job. Add the hours from job number two and sometimes number three and now you're talking reality.

 

[Bern80]

You're only talking about one job. Add the hours from job number two and sometimes number three and now you're talking reality.

And if you think that is the exception to the rule you would be wrong.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You're only talking about one job. Add the hours from job number two and sometimes number three and now you're talking reality.

Tell me how many people in the US are working Jobs 1,2 &3

In my experience and I'm willing to bet i have more working experience than you. Most people I know have very rarely if ever worked two jobs.

I've had 2 jobs most of my life and the people I know who took a second job did it for several reasons. mostly to afford something beyond basic living expenses such as saving for a trip or a house, some did it to get out of debt faster and then quit or cut hours and some did it for fun and for employee discounts on stuff.

even at my business, i offer everyone 40 hours and as yet I have yet to see any of my employees work more than 38. none of them have second jobs or are interested in overtime. So your anecdotal evidence and mine are at odds.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And if you think that is the exception to the rule you would be wrong.

prove it with some sort of evidence please.

 

[Bern80]

prove it with some sort of evidence please.

I'm fairly certain I'm agreeing with you, but here you go.

http://www.econ.ucsd.edu/~vramey/research/Historical_Hours.pdf

 

[Skull Pilot]

I'm fairly certain I'm agreeing with you, but here you go.

http://www.econ.ucsd.edu/~vramey/research/Historical_Hours.pdf

i have to take exception with your sources premise.

While in the very first couple pages we read:

The standard post-WWII series is extended back to 1900 using Kendrick’s estimates and Census data. (The data appendix gives details of all data construction.) By this measure, hours worked per capita have fallen substantially over the last 105 years, from almost 1600 hours a year to below 1000 hours a year.

But that is not the thrust of the paper. the essay is concerned with leisure hours, now i think we can agree that a decrease of leisure hours as defined in the paper to be does not necessarily mean that people are actually working more hours it just signifies that people are spending more time in what the author calls non leisure activities such as market work, home production, commuting and schooling for the last 105 years.

I am interested in market work only and i think that's what Ang was talking about when he mentioned job 1, 2&3

 

[Bern80]

i have to take exception with your sources premise.

While in the very first couple pages we read:

The standard post-WWII series is extended back to 1900 using Kendrick’s estimates and Census data. (The data appendix gives details of all data construction.) By this measure, hours worked per capita have fallen substantially over the last 105 years, from almost 1600 hours a year to below 1000 hours a year.

But that is not the thrust of the paper. the essay is concerned with leisure hours, now i think we can agree that a decrease of leisure hours as defined in the paper to be does not necessarily mean that people are actually working more hours it just signifies that people are spending more time in what the author calls non leisure activities such as market work, home production, commuting and schooling for the last 105 years.

I am interested in market work only and i think that's what Ang was talking about when he mentioned job 1, 2&3

I sitll think I'm agreeing with you and you don't know it. Essentially I am arguing that most American's do not put in a 40 hour work week and that paper backs that up if you examine the graphs at the end. Ang is arguing that American's are overworked.

 

[Zoomie1980]

I agree that government spending must be done wisely but delegating too much to private enterprise has resulted in more paperwork and graft than savings. Government is not synonymous with waste and corruption as you suggest. Private enterprise is. Government is a democratic institution over which we exert a certain amount of control, depending on how vigilant we are. Private enterprise is feudal in nature. We need government to regulate it so it does not usurp our government and suppress our rights and freedoms.
Of course, one is not free if one is not economically free. Look at any low income person working two jobs to get by. If big business has it's way, we'll all be overworked and too tired to muster a whimper to protest our exploitation. Big Government means control is in the hands of the voters not the elite CEO class.

What planet do you live on? Government is the epitome of waste and corruption because government has no real accountability. The Civil Service is NOT elected, cannot be fired short of criminal activity, they have a job for life and a pension to boot and have NO accountability of ANY kind! The government (civil service) is the prime example of what a socialistic society would be like. And it is an UGLY picture.

For the most part, business DOES have it's way and we have a distinctive skilled labor SHORTAGE in this country and that has been the case for two decades now! Companies lay on all sorts of lavish benefits and perks to attracted skilled labor. As for your low income person, well there you are talking about a NO-SKILL labor pool and those people are of little value to anyone, including their own society. Ask yourself WHY do the lack even the most basic employable skills?