Republican Budget cuts will cost 1 million Americans their jobs

[kaz]

We taxpayers don't OWE you guberment leeches a damn thing, not even your job. We are sick of carrying a lot of your dead asses around.
The only ones I OWE ANYTHING to is our MILITARY MEN AND WOMEN. They and their families sacrifice way more than you office sitting lard asses who do nothing all day.
And I know from experience, I worked for the Sec. of State of Illinois.

Now you all better start looking for WORK.

We should count government employees in the unemployment numbers, that way unemployment would be a better gauge of economic deadwood on the economy. Unfortunately they are worse then welfare recipients because they insist on doing something. And since they don't produce any product, that doing something inevitably leads to harming those who do.

 

[shintao]

OK, fair question honestly asked. If a worker works in the private sector, then they are helping their company produce a product or service that creates a profit, that profit is growth in the economy. They earn a salary, which they spend. But remember their salary came out of the economy as well, so their spending it puts it back into the economy, but it is not a net gain for the economy. The fact that their job helped their company take inputs, add value and output something of greater value did.

So you oppose off-shoring corporations, Wallstreet & stock holders? Because these do not put money back into the economy.

 

[Mr Natural]

Well, until you beloved corporations (with their record profits) start hiring en masse, government work might be the only way for people to earn a decent living.

When it comes to putting food on the table and a roof over their heads, people aren't going to give a shit where the paycheck comes from as long as it comes.

Just a reality check.

 

[shintao]

We taxpayers don't OWE you guberment leeches a damn thing, not even your job. We are sick of carrying a lot of your dead asses around.
The only ones I OWE ANYTHING to is our MILITARY MEN AND WOMEN. They and their families sacrifice way more than you office sitting lard asses who do nothing all day.
And I know from experience, I worked for the Sec. of State of Illinois.

Now you all better start looking for WORK.

We should count government employees in the unemployment numbers, that way unemployment would be a better gauge of economic deadwood on the economy. Unfortunately they are worse then welfare recipients because they insist on doing something. And since they don't produce any product, that doing something inevitably leads to harming those who do.

Yeah, we should end all government services and the military, and make corporations stand on their own two feet.

 

[kaz]

So you oppose off-shoring corporations, Wallstreet & stock holders? Because these do not put money back into the economy.

I'll give you the short answers, I have a hard time thinking you care since you're an anti-capitalist.

- Offshoring is done either to generate overseas revenue or reduce cost, both of which do generate a profit and benefit the economy. Ironically it is the Left who make it difficult to repatriate money and who drive up the cost of moving production offshore through extensive regulation and who drive up the cost of remaining onshore with the same. This all reduces profit and harms the economy. This would be addressed literally in an econ 101 course. Efficiency helps the economy.

- Wall Street - Capital is the engine of capitalism. But since you hate capitalism I won't bother to go into this one since it's the heart of your enemy.

- Stock Holders - Um...the owners of companies don't have anything to do with profit? I don't know what I can tell you, Mao

 

[Stephanie]

There won't be any Guberment jobs, if the TAXPAYERS don't have the money to be forced to pay them, now will there.

They better start thinking of other work, just like 10% unemployed in this country is doing RIGHT NOW.

 

[kaz]

Well, until you beloved corporations (with their record profits) start hiring en masse, government work might be the only way for people to earn a decent living.

When it comes to putting food on the table and a roof over their heads, people aren't going to give a shit where the paycheck comes from as long as it comes.

Just a reality check.

It's no reality check, it's reality devoid. "Reality" is as I pointed out and you're ignoring that government doesn't produce anything. Government salaries come out of the economy. Without their producing a profit, they won't produce and government will have nothing to tax and your government employees will have nothing to buy.

BTW, I love some corporations, I hate some, and I'm in the middle for others. My arguments to you are regarding economic growth. Your feelings about government workers or my feelings about corporations have nothing to do with positive economic growth. Just because you can't separate your emotions from that don't assume I can't. There are plenty of companies I despise, but that doesn't have anything to do with their economic impact.

 

[kaz]

Yeah, we should end all government services and the military, and make corporations stand on their own two feet.

That's not what I said, I said we should count the people accurately who don't produce any economic benefit. While I come from a military family (including a brother and cousin who were in Gulf War I), the military doesn't produce any economic benefit. I never said we should have no one who produces no economic benefit, I said we should count them accurately.

 

[Avorysuds]

Recession means the economy is contracting, which means it's producing less. Government produces nothing. Therefore, government jobs produce no economic value. Therefore, the idea that eliminating any number of government jobs could cause a recession is just economically clueless. Liberalism is a religion, it's the only way to explain concocting clueless arguments like this.

You mean people working those jobs don't spend any of their money?

What do they do with it, stuff it in their mattresses?

OK, fair question honestly asked. If a worker works in the private sector, then they are helping their company produce a product or service that creates a profit, that profit is growth in the economy. They earn a salary, which they spend. But remember their salary came out of the economy as well, so their spending it puts it back into the economy, but it is not a net gain for the economy. The fact that their job helped their company take inputs, add value and output something of greater value did.

In the case of a government worker, their salary comes out of the economy, but they do not do a job which grows the economy, which means that the best they could ever have is a zero impact on the economy since the money taken to pay their salary is taken out of the economy to start with. So to even not harm the economy, you would have to assume zero waste. That government doesn't waste money is in fact preposterous. So government jobs do in reality do nothing but harm the economy.

Again, that removing government workers from the economy could harm it is an impossible contradiction. There is no economic value created.

Well done! Expect people to fight you anyways!

 

[Bern80]

Well, until you beloved corporations (with their record profits) start hiring en masse, government work might be the only way for people to earn a decent living.

When it comes to putting food on the table and a roof over their heads, people aren't going to give a shit where the paycheck comes from as long as it comes.

Just a reality check.

Here's a reality check for you. It is not the obligation of anyone else but YOU to provide yourself a job, income and standard of living.

There is no shortage of jobs for those hopefully soon to be out of work government employees. There is a shortage in the skill sets required to do them. It is YOUR job to figure out what YOU need to do to be of tangible value to someone.

 

[Mr Natural]

Well, until you beloved corporations (with their record profits) start hiring en masse, government work might be the only way for people to earn a decent living.

When it comes to putting food on the table and a roof over their heads, people aren't going to give a shit where the paycheck comes from as long as it comes.

Just a reality check.

Here's a reality check for you. It is not the obligation of anyone else but YOU to provide yourself a job, income and standard of living.

There is no shortage of jobs for those hopefully soon to be out of work government employees. There is a shortage in the skill sets required to do them. It is YOUR job to figure out what YOU need to do to be of tangible value to someone.

If there was no shortage of jobs, then we wouldn't be looking a 10% unemployment for the foreseeable future and perhaps the new norm.

 

[shintao]

So you oppose off-shoring corporations, Wallstreet & stock holders? Because these do not put money back into the economy.

I'll give you the short answers, I have a hard time thinking you care since you're an anti-capitalist.

- Offshoring is done either to generate overseas revenue or reduce cost, both of which do generate a profit and benefit the economy. Ironically it is the Left who make it difficult to repatriate money and who drive up the cost of moving production offshore through extensive regulation and who drive up the cost of remaining onshore with the same. This all reduces profit and harms the economy. This would be addressed literally in an econ 101 course. Efficiency helps the economy.

- Wall Street - Capital is the engine of capitalism. But since you hate capitalism I won't bother to go into this one since it's the heart of your enemy.

- Stock Holders - Um...the owners of companies don't have anything to do with profit? I don't know what I can tell you, Mao

Nice dodge kaz. You agree with point one, and refuse to endulge in 2 & 3. What I said is correct, so what do you want to do about it, since you are willing to ax gov. employees who are taxed & contribute their wages to society at the local level where it is needed.

Straw man: "the owners of companies don't have anything to do with profit." That wasn't the point Kaz. Stocks contribute nothing to the economy, and sit in safe deposit boxes as worthless paper that does not circulate for others to borrow or use.

 

[shintao]

Yeah, we should end all government services and the military, and make corporations stand on their own two feet.

That's not what I said, I said we should count the people accurately who don't produce any economic benefit. While I come from a military family (including a brother and cousin who were in Gulf War I), the military doesn't produce any economic benefit. I never said we should have no one who produces no economic benefit, I said we should count them accurately.

All you want to do is count people accurately? I think that is why we have 10% unemployed, because someone decided to count accurately.

Like charity, those people produce no economic benefit by taking jobs from the unemployed. Count them.

 

[boedicca]

Yeah, we should end all government services and the military, and make corporations stand on their own two feet.

That's not what I said, I said we should count the people accurately who don't produce any economic benefit. While I come from a military family (including a brother and cousin who were in Gulf War I), the military doesn't produce any economic benefit. I never said we should have no one who produces no economic benefit, I said we should count them accurately.

I disagree with this. There are some essential services which government can best perform (law enforcement, courts, military). The problem we have is that a bunch-o-crap that is completely Not Essential has been added to the role of government over the years. Let's get rid of that and preserve the jobs that do have value.

 

[kaz]

So you oppose off-shoring corporations, Wallstreet & stock holders? Because these do not put money back into the economy.

I'll give you the short answers, I have a hard time thinking you care since you're an anti-capitalist.

- Offshoring is done either to generate overseas revenue or reduce cost, both of which do generate a profit and benefit the economy. Ironically it is the Left who make it difficult to repatriate money and who drive up the cost of moving production offshore through extensive regulation and who drive up the cost of remaining onshore with the same. This all reduces profit and harms the economy. This would be addressed literally in an econ 101 course. Efficiency helps the economy.

- Wall Street - Capital is the engine of capitalism. But since you hate capitalism I won't bother to go into this one since it's the heart of your enemy.

- Stock Holders - Um...the owners of companies don't have anything to do with profit? I don't know what I can tell you, Mao

Nice dodge kaz. You agree with point one, and refuse to endulge in 2 & 3. What I said is correct, so what do you want to do about it, since you are willing to ax gov. employees who are taxed & contribute their wages to society at the local level where it is needed.

Straw man: "the owners of companies don't have anything to do with profit." That wasn't the point Kaz. Stocks contribute nothing to the economy, and sit in safe deposit boxes as worthless paper that does not circulate for others to borrow or use.

Dude, I said you were wrong on point one and explained why. With stockholders you're referring to the piece of paper, I'm referring to that it refers to a share of the company. The company that creates the economic growth. Stocks are how we keep track of company ownership. Do you know anything about capital markets at all?

 

[DiveCon]

Yeah, we should end all government services and the military, and make corporations stand on their own two feet.

That's not what I said, I said we should count the people accurately who don't produce any economic benefit. While I come from a military family (including a brother and cousin who were in Gulf War I), the military doesn't produce any economic benefit. I never said we should have no one who produces no economic benefit, I said we should count them accurately.

All you want to do is count people accurately? I think that is why yoy have 10% unemployed, because someone decided to count accurately.

Like charity, those people produce no economic benefit by taking jobs from the unemployed. Count them.

wrong, if they were counting accurately, that number would likely be over 16%

 

[kaz]

That's not what I said, I said we should count the people accurately who don't produce any economic benefit. While I come from a military family (including a brother and cousin who were in Gulf War I), the military doesn't produce any economic benefit. I never said we should have no one who produces no economic benefit, I said we should count them accurately.

All you want to do is count people accurately? I think that is why yoy have 10% unemployed, because someone decided to count accurately.

Like charity, those people produce no economic benefit by taking jobs from the unemployed. Count them.

You sell your boy Obama short. He said if we elected him Unemployment would top ff at 8%. There are a lot more then 10% of the country not producing economic benefit and I'm pointing out his massive growth in government is a big part of what we're not counting.

Dude, I said we are NOT counting unemployed accurately and we should. How can even a liberal get out of that we are counting them accurately. Congratulations on Obama, it's not easy to be a worse, more economically destructive president then W, and yet he breezed by that high hurdle.

 

[kaz]

That's not what I said, I said we should count the people accurately who don't produce any economic benefit. While I come from a military family (including a brother and cousin who were in Gulf War I), the military doesn't produce any economic benefit. I never said we should have no one who produces no economic benefit, I said we should count them accurately.

All you want to do is count people accurately? I think that is why yoy have 10% unemployed, because someone decided to count accurately.

Like charity, those people produce no economic benefit by taking jobs from the unemployed. Count them.

wrong, if they were counting accurately, that number would likely be over 16%

I'm arguing if you count government as they produce no economic benefit it'd be a lot higher then that.

 

[boedicca]

That's not what I said, I said we should count the people accurately who don't produce any economic benefit. While I come from a military family (including a brother and cousin who were in Gulf War I), the military doesn't produce any economic benefit. I never said we should have no one who produces no economic benefit, I said we should count them accurately.

All you want to do is count people accurately? I think that is why yoy have 10% unemployed, because someone decided to count accurately.

Like charity, those people produce no economic benefit by taking jobs from the unemployed. Count them.

wrong, if they were counting accurately, that number would likely be over 16%

Actually, more like 22%

Alternate Unemployment Charts

 

[shintao]

I'll give you the short answers, I have a hard time thinking you care since you're an anti-capitalist.

- Offshoring is done either to generate overseas revenue or reduce cost, both of which do generate a profit and benefit the economy. Ironically it is the Left who make it difficult to repatriate money and who drive up the cost of moving production offshore through extensive regulation and who drive up the cost of remaining onshore with the same. This all reduces profit and harms the economy. This would be addressed literally in an econ 101 course. Efficiency helps the economy.

- Wall Street - Capital is the engine of capitalism. But since you hate capitalism I won't bother to go into this one since it's the heart of your enemy.

- Stock Holders - Um...the owners of companies don't have anything to do with profit? I don't know what I can tell you, Mao

Nice dodge kaz. You agree with point one, and refuse to endulge in 2 & 3. What I said is correct, so what do you want to do about it, since you are willing to ax gov. employees who are taxed & contribute their wages to society at the local level where it is needed.

Straw man: "the owners of companies don't have anything to do with profit." That wasn't the point Kaz. Stocks contribute nothing to the economy, and sit in safe deposit boxes as worthless paper that does not circulate for others to borrow or use.

Dude, I said you were wrong on point one and explained why. With stockholders you're referring to the piece of paper, I'm referring to that it refers to a share of the company. The company that creates the economic growth. Stocks are how we keep track of company ownership. Do you know anything about capital markets at all?

Stocks are a means to avoid borrowing from banks, steal wages off the backs of employees, and sit in safe deposit boxes out of economic circulation. Don't you know anything from your Eco-101?? Best worry about yourself dude. LMAO!