tjvh
Senior Member
- May 10, 2012
- 6,893
- 918
- 48
Why don't you just explain what it is you're trying to say rather than constantly linking to other people's intellectual property, or are original thoughts completely lost on you?
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Loss Of Government Jobs Is Holding Back The Economy
- Thread starter Lakhota
- Start date
Why don't you just explain what it is you're trying to say rather than constantly linking to other people's intellectual property, or are original thoughts completely lost on you?
Part of my job includes performing actuarial calculations. I minored in mathematics. In high school I scored 800 on the math portion of the SAT. I can multiply two digit numbers in my head (a rather worthless skill with the advent of calculators). All those who know me would consider my to be mathematically inclined. Of course, since you do not know me from Adam, you may call me deluded. Typical conservative ad hominem attack.
Some regulatory/administrative functions must be handled by government. I will list some:
1) Regulation of our water and food.
2) The judicial system
3) Workmens Compensation
4) Workplace Saftey
5) The Internal Revenue Service
6) The Security and Exchange Commission
The debate is not to insult all those who work for the government labeling their work as non-productive, but rather to determine what functions of government are essential and efficient. Useless administrative functions would of course be a drag on our system.
Of course this debate differs from the mantra that many conservatives have been brainwashed with: Private industry good, all government bad, unfettered capitalism good, all regulations bad.
No conservative says all govt is bad. ALl of us agree there is some legitimate function of gov't. Unfortunately about 85% or more of what gov't actually does today is not a legitimate function of gov't.
Still remember your SAT score? Pathetic.
The size of government is debatable. I am not so sure about that 85% number.
Yea I remember my SAT score. I remember many things. If one doesn't do drugs it's not that hard. Sorry if your memory is failing you.
Part of my job includes performing actuarial calculations. I minored in mathematics. In high school I scored 800 on the math portion of the SAT. I can multiply two digit numbers in my head (a rather worthless skill with the advent of calculators). All those who know me would consider my to be mathematically inclined. Of course, since you do not know me from Adam, you may call me deluded. Typical conservative ad hominem attack.
Some regulatory/administrative functions must be handled by government. I will list some:
1) Regulation of our water and food.
2) The judicial system
3) Workmens Compensation
4) Workplace Saftey
5) The Internal Revenue Service
6) The Security and Exchange Commission
The debate is not to insult all those who work for the government labeling their work as non-productive, but rather to determine what functions of government are essential and efficient. Useless administrative functions would of course be a drag on our system.
Of course this debate differs from the mantra that many conservatives have been brainwashed with: Private industry good, all government bad, unfettered capitalism good, all regulations bad.
No conservative says all govt is bad. ALl of us agree there is some legitimate function of gov't. Unfortunately about 85% or more of what gov't actually does today is not a legitimate function of gov't.
Still remember your SAT score? Pathetic.
It was only a couple years ago
One can only wish it were only a couple of years ago. Oh to be young again.
To be fair, Government must spend some moneys. But most should be at State and local level. It is the Federal Government that has grown too large and spends so much for so little gain......
I don't find state or local governments to be significantly more efficient.
Some do a much better job than others..........
Public sector workers provide services such as teaching our children, protecting our citizens, maintaining our roads, and fighting fires. They pay taxes. With their paychecks they buy goods and services which fuel our economy.
Sure, not everyone can work for the government. We need a private sector. However i grow tired of the mantra that government workers produce nothing.
I used to work in a laboratory at a wastewater treatment plant for a pretty large city in GA. I guess I was one of these shiftless government leeches, huh? Clean water released back into the river after proper sewage treatment (for a population of 100K+) is SO not worth it. RW'ers every day prove what colossal, unthinking morons they are.
No one said that. Why is it so difficult to understand? Which government did you work for? Federal State or City? It's the federal Government that has overgrown it's means......
Wyatt earp
Diamond Member
- Apr 21, 2012
- 69,975
- 16,392
- 2,180
Part of my job includes performing actuarial calculations. I minored in mathematics. In high school I scored 800 on the math portion of the SAT. I can multiply two digit numbers in my head (a rather worthless skill with the advent of calculators). All those who know me would consider my to be mathematically inclined. Of course, since you do not know me from Adam, you may call me deluded. Typical conservative ad hominem attack.
Some regulatory/administrative functions must be handled by government. I will list some:
1) Regulation of our water and food.
2) The judicial system
3) Workmens Compensation
4) Workplace Saftey
5) The Internal Revenue Service
6) The Security and Exchange Commission
The debate is not to insult all those who work for the government labeling their work as non-productive, but rather to determine what functions of government are essential and efficient. Useless administrative functions would of course be a drag on our system.
Of course this debate differs from the mantra that many conservatives have been brainwashed with: Private industry good, all government bad, unfettered capitalism good, all regulations bad.
No conservative says all govt is bad. ALl of us agree there is some legitimate function of gov't. Unfortunately about 85% or more of what gov't actually does today is not a legitimate function of gov't.
Still remember your SAT score? Pathetic.
The size of government is debatable. I am not so sure about that 85% number.
Yea I remember my SAT score. I remember many things. If one doesn't do drugs it's not that hard. Sorry if your memory is failing you.
Dont know about most old folks here. But I remember the first girl I kissed, my 1st car a 72' Grand torino, and my 2nd car a 71' Grand prix!!! the day of my marriage, the day my daughter was born, but an SAT score? why? lol your talking like Al Bundy now in his three touch down passes in a game or something like that..
Part of my job includes performing actuarial calculations. I minored in mathematics. In high school I scored 800 on the math portion of the SAT. I can multiply two digit numbers in my head (a rather worthless skill with the advent of calculators). All those who know me would consider my to be mathematically inclined. Of course, since you do not know me from Adam, you may call me deluded. Typical conservative ad hominem attack.
Some regulatory/administrative functions must be handled by government. I will list some:
1) Regulation of our water and food.
2) The judicial system
3) Workmens Compensation
4) Workplace Saftey
5) The Internal Revenue Service
6) The Security and Exchange Commission
The debate is not to insult all those who work for the government labeling their work as non-productive, but rather to determine what functions of government are essential and efficient. Useless administrative functions would of course be a drag on our system.
Of course this debate differs from the mantra that many conservatives have been brainwashed with: Private industry good, all government bad, unfettered capitalism good, all regulations bad.
No conservative says all govt is bad. ALl of us agree there is some legitimate function of gov't. Unfortunately about 85% or more of what gov't actually does today is not a legitimate function of gov't.
Still remember your SAT score? Pathetic.
The size of government is debatable. I am not so sure about that 85% number.
Yea I remember my SAT score. I remember many things. If one doesn't do drugs it's not that hard. Sorry if your memory is failing you.
You're right. It could be 90%.
It happens I remember my SAT score too. But I've done a bunch of more important things since then.
A privately owned company could do the same job more efficiently`
as long as they have the same people checking on what goes on maybe.....but i would not trust the owners of that plant to keep that water clean.....especially if it means they might lose a few bucks....
You trust the government to do the work but don;t trust the EPA to regulate the ever-living fuck out of them?
not what i said.....i think a private Company is very capable of doing the work more efficiently........im saying that unless SOMEONE is checking the product.... i dont trust a private company to police themselves with regards to consumer safety......
No conservative says all govt is bad. ALl of us agree there is some legitimate function of gov't. Unfortunately about 85% or more of what gov't actually does today is not a legitimate function of gov't.
Still remember your SAT score? Pathetic.
The size of government is debatable. I am not so sure about that 85% number.
Yea I remember my SAT score. I remember many things. If one doesn't do drugs it's not that hard. Sorry if your memory is failing you.
Dont know about most old folks here. But I remember the first girl I kissed, my 1st car a 72' Grand torino, and my 2nd car a 71' Grand prix!!! the day of my marriage, the day my daughter was born, but an SAT score? why? lol your talking like Al Bundy now in his three touch down passes in a game or something like that..
So what? I remember a number. Numbers are something that stick in my head. Yea I remember the first car I bought a Toyota pickup.
I have no idea what Al Bundy has to do with this. Best lay off the drugs.
Your wedding anniversary and your daughter's birthday? You better remember those.
No conservative says all govt is bad. ALl of us agree there is some legitimate function of gov't. Unfortunately about 85% or more of what gov't actually does today is not a legitimate function of gov't.
Still remember your SAT score? Pathetic.
The size of government is debatable. I am not so sure about that 85% number.
Yea I remember my SAT score. I remember many things. If one doesn't do drugs it's not that hard. Sorry if your memory is failing you.
You're right. It could be 90%.
It happens I remember my SAT score too. But I've done a bunch of more important things since then.
With nearly 27,000 posts on this forum it is doubtful you have done anything important since high school.. Unless you consider sitting on your ass all day posting important.
Yea, I have done a lot of important things since high school.
90%. Care to back that up or you just talking out your ass?
Steelplate
Bluesman
Just remember something folks....those that bemoan the Federal Government? Funding for state needs come from the Federal as well as state taxation.
Funding for local needs come from those Federal dollars, State taxation, and local taxation.
So....if the plan is to cut off the head of the Snake, so to speak, at the Federal Level... there goes a hell of a lot of those funds. That puts the burden onto the states...so, the state has one of two choices....raise state taxes, or make drastic cuts....which trickles down to the local level.
There are reasons that many of our agricultural and rural states get way more Federal funds than more.populous ones...they don't have the population to support their needs.
For your consideration.
Funding for local needs come from those Federal dollars, State taxation, and local taxation.
So....if the plan is to cut off the head of the Snake, so to speak, at the Federal Level... there goes a hell of a lot of those funds. That puts the burden onto the states...so, the state has one of two choices....raise state taxes, or make drastic cuts....which trickles down to the local level.
There are reasons that many of our agricultural and rural states get way more Federal funds than more.populous ones...they don't have the population to support their needs.
For your consideration.
hortysir
In Memorial of 47
Just remember something folks....those that bemoan the Federal Government? Funding for state needs come from the Federal as well as state taxation.
Funding for local needs come from those Federal dollars, State taxation, and local taxation.
So....if the plan is to cut off the head of the Snake, so to speak, at the Federal Level... there goes a hell of a lot of those funds. That puts the burden onto the states...so, the state has one of two choices....raise state taxes, or make drastic cuts....which trickles down to the local level.
There are reasons that many of our agricultural and rural states get way more Federal funds than more.populous ones...they don't have the population to support their needs.
For your consideration.
And a good portion of that Fed money comes with extortion
"Keep your speed limits below X or lose funding", etc...
Steelplate
Bluesman
Just remember something folks....those that bemoan the Federal Government? Funding for state needs come from the Federal as well as state taxation.
Funding for local needs come from those Federal dollars, State taxation, and local taxation.
So....if the plan is to cut off the head of the Snake, so to speak, at the Federal Level... there goes a hell of a lot of those funds. That puts the burden onto the states...so, the state has one of two choices....raise state taxes, or make drastic cuts....which trickles down to the local level.
There are reasons that many of our agricultural and rural states get way more Federal funds than more.populous ones...they don't have the population to support their needs.
For your consideration.
And a good portion of that Fed money comes with extortion
"Keep your speed limits below X or lose funding", etc...
Well...public safety is important....you against speed limits? DUI laws....etc?
hortysir
In Memorial of 47
Just remember something folks....those that bemoan the Federal Government? Funding for state needs come from the Federal as well as state taxation.
Funding for local needs come from those Federal dollars, State taxation, and local taxation.
So....if the plan is to cut off the head of the Snake, so to speak, at the Federal Level... there goes a hell of a lot of those funds. That puts the burden onto the states...so, the state has one of two choices....raise state taxes, or make drastic cuts....which trickles down to the local level.
There are reasons that many of our agricultural and rural states get way more Federal funds than more.populous ones...they don't have the population to support their needs.
For your consideration.
And a good portion of that Fed money comes with extortion
"Keep your speed limits below X or lose funding", etc...
Well...public safety is important....you against speed limits? DUI laws....etc?
Just against the Fed Gov't telling a State what to do
Steelplate
Bluesman
And a good portion of that Fed money comes with extortion
"Keep your speed limits below X or lose funding", etc...
Well...public safety is important....you against speed limits? DUI laws....etc?
Just against the Fed Gov't telling a State what to do
Even when your getting Federal Funds?
That's about as messed up as Wall Street getting that bailout in 2008 and demanding that no strings be attached... then they quickly used OUR money and gave it to the CEO'S that caused the need for the bailout to begin with and banked the rest, while small businesses were struggling and closing their doors and citizens were losing their homes...
But hey...your state can always try to go it alone....
Well...public safety is important....you against speed limits? DUI laws....etc?
Just against the Fed Gov't telling a State what to do
Even when your getting Federal Funds?
That's about as messed up as Wall Street getting that bailout in 2008 and demanding that no strings be attached... then they quickly used OUR money and gave it to the CEO'S that caused the need for the bailout to begin with and banked the rest, while small businesses were struggling and closing their doors and citizens were losing their homes...
But hey...your state can always try to go it alone....
That's about as messed up as Wall Street getting that bailout in 2008 and demanding that no strings be attached... then they quickly used OUR money and gave it to the CEO'S that caused the need for the bailout to begin with and banked the rest
And then Wall Street paid it back, with billions in interest. Bastards!
Steelplate
Bluesman
Just against the Fed Gov't telling a State what to do
Even when your getting Federal Funds?
That's about as messed up as Wall Street getting that bailout in 2008 and demanding that no strings be attached... then they quickly used OUR money and gave it to the CEO'S that caused the need for the bailout to begin with and banked the rest, while small businesses were struggling and closing their doors and citizens were losing their homes...
But hey...your state can always try to go it alone....
That's about as messed up as Wall Street getting that bailout in 2008 and demanding that no strings be attached... then they quickly used OUR money and gave it to the CEO'S that caused the need for the bailout to begin with and banked the rest
And then Wall Street paid it back, with billions in interest. Bastards!
They were supposed to use it to spur the economy.... THEN pay it back. They purposely did nothing...because they didn't have to.
Even when your getting Federal Funds?
That's about as messed up as Wall Street getting that bailout in 2008 and demanding that no strings be attached... then they quickly used OUR money and gave it to the CEO'S that caused the need for the bailout to begin with and banked the rest, while small businesses were struggling and closing their doors and citizens were losing their homes...
But hey...your state can always try to go it alone....
That's about as messed up as Wall Street getting that bailout in 2008 and demanding that no strings be attached... then they quickly used OUR money and gave it to the CEO'S that caused the need for the bailout to begin with and banked the rest
And then Wall Street paid it back, with billions in interest. Bastards!
They were supposed to use it to spur the economy.... THEN pay it back. They purposely did nothing...because they didn't have to.
No, they were supposed to use it to prevent the banking system from collapsing.
What should they have done to "spur the economy"?
Why is the OP a fail? Government (public sector) job losses are government (public sector) job losses. Obama has tried to stimulate the public sector but Congress keeps blocking him.
Yep he tried to stimulate it with cash for clunkers, Solyndra, electric cars and many other similar pet projects with oh so unimpressive results.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 133
- Replies
- 71
- Views
- 858
- Replies
- 9
- Views
- 168
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 5
- Views
- 27
- Replies
- 28
- Views
- 252
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8276
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 476
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-