What Are Conservatives Trying to Conserve?

[shalabi]

When are you sheep going to realize that so called conservatives are no different than so called liberals.

Neither party spends less than the other.
Both parties increase the size of government at every turn
Both parties want to tell you how to live your lives.

Free your mind from this antiquated 2 party system.

This pretty much sums it up.

 

[Oldstyle]

Taxation is mandated by the Constitution. And the government provides a plethora of infrastructure that allows the private economy to thrive.

But if you are so into the "private sector", perhaps you can find a country started by the private sector?

Because I don't think one ever existed.

You're a bit misguided, Sallow. The US used to be a place where the government provided the means for the private sector to thrive but that was because we used to be a country of laws that private citizens could count on to protect them from that government. This Administration believes it has the duty and the right to change that. From the passage of health care "mandates" to the imposition of "moratoriums" on drilling to the Federal "lawsuits" against businesses opening plants in right to work States to the restructuring of who is first in line to receive debt payments in the GM bailouts to determining what private firms should pay their executives to new regulations on just about everything...this Administration believes that the Federal Government knows what is best for us and should have the power to force us to do what "it" wants regardless of what "we" want. That ISN'T the America that millions have fled other places in the world to come to. When this Administration talks about making fundamental changes to America what they are saying is that they want to do away with the very freedoms that made America what it was in the first place and replace it with a cradle to the grave "Nanny State" that makes decisions for it's citizens instead of the other way around.

Proof???

Proof? I just listed things that this Administration is doing. Did you want more? Are you blissfully unaware of how the policies of the Obama Administration effect our country?

 

[Skull Pilot]

The point is that government employees do not add to the net tax revenue.

Untrue. If government employees didn't do their jobs, the entire economy would collapse into chaos, and there wouldn't be any tax revenue at all.

Arguments like yours only work if you imagine the government's contribution of law and order and public service being provided by acts of God, or benevolent fairies or something.

The government could contact those jobs out and get all the same work done for less money

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Give what?

Federal workers pay taxes and contribute to the economy, but you don't want to believe that.

You do realize that the taxes federal workers pay are totally funded by the private sector don't you?

And taking money from one sector to give to another does not really contribute to the economy. What difference does it make if I spend my money or the government gives it to someone else to spend?

I'm a federal workers and I do contribute and pay taxes, thank you very much.

 

[Oldstyle]

The point is that government employees do not add to the net tax revenue.

Untrue. If government employees didn't do their jobs, the entire economy would collapse into chaos, and there wouldn't be any tax revenue at all.

Arguments like yours only work if you imagine the government's contribution of law and order and public service being provided by acts of God, or benevolent fairies or something.

My argument with your view of the importance of governmental employees is that you've got the tail wagging the dog. Our Federal Government wasn't set up by the Founding Fathers to be aN overseer...it was set up to provide certain functions that local government and State governments couldn't...such as national defense and international commerce. The FF understood that the more control kept locally...in the people's hands...the less chance of tyranny. What you're seeing with our present "Imperial Federal Government" is a push to consolidate more and more power and control in Washington to the exclusion of local citizens.

Yes, you need certain services to be provided by government in order for an orderly and safe environment to be maintained but there is no need at all for government to interject itself into other facets of life. The main problem I have with progressives is that you folks honestly believe that government officials are better at problem solving than the people and I think that's laughable.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Federal workers pay taxes and contribute to the economy, but you don't want to believe that.

You do realize that the taxes federal workers pay are totally funded by the private sector don't you?

And taking money from one sector to give to another does not really contribute to the economy. What difference does it make if I spend my money or the government gives it to someone else to spend?

I'm a federal workers and I do contribute and pay taxes, thank you very much.

But those taxes do not contribute to the net tax revenue of the country because the money you pay in taxes was already taken from the private sector.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

The point is that government employees do not add to the net tax revenue.

Untrue. If government employees didn't do their jobs, the entire economy would collapse into chaos, and there wouldn't be any tax revenue at all.

Arguments like yours only work if you imagine the government's contribution of law and order and public service being provided by acts of God, or benevolent fairies or something.

The government could contact those jobs out and get all the same work done for less money

BS, I work as a federal employee doing the same job I did in the Air Force, I'm better qualified and have seen contractors attempt to do my job and did it piss poor, its a lie that contracting work out to less qualified people will bring the same quality or work and even more work, there isn't a contractor who can do a better job that me.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

You do realize that the taxes federal workers pay are totally funded by the private sector don't you?

And taking money from one sector to give to another does not really contribute to the economy. What difference does it make if I spend my money or the government gives it to someone else to spend?

I'm a federal workers and I do contribute and pay taxes, thank you very much.

But those taxes do not contribute to the net tax revenue of the country because the money you pay in taxes was already taken from the private sector.

They do too contribute, my taxes go to SS, Medicare, etc and with my wages I buy things from the private sector who in turn put that money back into the economy when they pay taxes so what the hell are you talking about?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I'm a federal workers and I do contribute and pay taxes, thank you very much.

But those taxes do not contribute to the net tax revenue of the country because the money you pay in taxes was already taken from the private sector.

They do too contribute, my taxes go to SS, Medicare, etc and with my wages I buy things from the private sector who in turn put that money back into the economy when they pay taxes so what the hell are you talking about?

Another dense as ******* concrete government hack.

If 100% of your pay comes from taxes then the government takes some of that money from you after it was taken from me the money taken from you does not increase the government net tax revenue.

And as far as government workers being more qualified to to sweep floors, clean toilets and rake leaves or collect tolls or deliver the mail, you're sadly mistaken

And tell me how taking my money and giving it to you to spend contributes more to the economy than if I kept it and spent it myself.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

But those taxes do not contribute to the net tax revenue of the country because the money you pay in taxes was already taken from the private sector.

They do too contribute, my taxes go to SS, Medicare, etc and with my wages I buy things from the private sector who in turn put that money back into the economy when they pay taxes so what the hell are you talking about?

Another dense as ******* concrete government hack.

If 100% of your pay comes from taxes then the government takes some of that money from you after it was taken from me the money taken from you does not increase the government net tax revenue.

And as far as government workers being more qualified to to sweep floors, clean toilets and rake leaves or collect tolls or deliver the mail, you're sadly mistaken

And tell me how taking my money and giving it to you to spend contributes more to the economy than if I kept it and spent it myself.

Good chunk of my money goes to private sector so you're the one that's dense as hell with your envy.

 

[Skull Pilot]

They do too contribute, my taxes go to SS, Medicare, etc and with my wages I buy things from the private sector who in turn put that money back into the economy when they pay taxes so what the hell are you talking about?

Another dense as ******* concrete government hack.

If 100% of your pay comes from taxes then the government takes some of that money from you after it was taken from me the money taken from you does not increase the government net tax revenue.

And as far as government workers being more qualified to to sweep floors, clean toilets and rake leaves or collect tolls or deliver the mail, you're sadly mistaken

And tell me how taking my money and giving it to you to spend contributes more to the economy than if I kept it and spent it myself.

Good chunk of my money goes to private sector so you're the one that's dense as hell with your envy.

The money you spend was first taken from people like me who don't work for the government.

So tell me how is taking money from me and giving it to you so you can spend it better than letting me keep it and spend it myself?

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Another dense as ******* concrete government hack.

If 100% of your pay comes from taxes then the government takes some of that money from you after it was taken from me the money taken from you does not increase the government net tax revenue.

And as far as government workers being more qualified to to sweep floors, clean toilets and rake leaves or collect tolls or deliver the mail, you're sadly mistaken

And tell me how taking my money and giving it to you to spend contributes more to the economy than if I kept it and spent it myself.

Good chunk of my money goes to private sector so you're the one that's dense as hell with your envy.

The money you spend was first taken from people like me who don't work for the government.

So tell me how is taking money from me and giving it to you so you can spend it better than letting me keep it and spend it myself?

The private sector wouldn't get nearly enough money without the money federal workers spend.

 

[Avatar4321]

The point is that government employees do not add to the net tax revenue.

Untrue. If government employees didn't do their jobs, the entire economy would collapse into chaos, and there wouldn't be any tax revenue at all.

Arguments like yours only work if you imagine the government's contribution of law and order and public service being provided by acts of God, or benevolent fairies or something.

How exactly would a government employee not doing his/her job stop me from buying or trading goods and services with someone else?

How will someone in government not doing their job prevent me from, say, mowing someone's lawn in exchange for a loaf of bread?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Good chunk of my money goes to private sector so you're the one that's dense as hell with your envy.

The money you spend was first taken from people like me who don't work for the government.

So tell me how is taking money from me and giving it to you so you can spend it better than letting me keep it and spend it myself?

The private sector wouldn't get nearly enough money without the money federal workers spend.

If the private sector kept more of its own money rather than paying government hacks then the people in the private sector would have more money than they do now not less.

 

[Avatar4321]

The private sector wouldn't get nearly enough money without the money federal workers spend.

Actually, if there werent any federal workers the private sector work make much much more money because those workers would be, by default, private sector workers.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

The private sector wouldn't get nearly enough money without the money federal workers spend.

Actually, if there werent any federal workers the private sector work make much much more money because those workers would be, by default, private sector workers.

The private sector would not be paying my salary if I didn't give them my money, I'm talking strictly about *ME*. Private sector bosses would get more money not private sector employees would make more money if there were not federal employees and there isn't a private sector person who can do my DoD job.

 

[Dragon]

The point is that government employees do not add to the net tax revenue.

Untrue. If government employees didn't do their jobs, the entire economy would collapse into chaos, and there wouldn't be any tax revenue at all.

Arguments like yours only work if you imagine the government's contribution of law and order and public service being provided by acts of God, or benevolent fairies or something.

The government could contact those jobs out and get all the same work done for less money

First of all, untrue. Look at anything where third party companies are involved compared to direct government employees, and you'll find it always costs more, all due to the profit taken by the private company. That's why student loans have been taken away from the banks as middlemen.

Secondly, irrelevant even if it was true; it would still be the government spending resources to get a result, and your argument, if valid, would hold true either way. It doesn't, therefore it's NOT valid.

 

[Si modo]

Untrue. If government employees didn't do their jobs, the entire economy would collapse into chaos, and there wouldn't be any tax revenue at all.

Arguments like yours only work if you imagine the government's contribution of law and order and public service being provided by acts of God, or benevolent fairies or something.

The government could contact those jobs out and get all the same work done for less money

First of all, untrue. Look at anything where third party companies are involved compared to direct government employees, and you'll find it always costs more, ....

That is far from true, especially around here.

 

[Oldstyle]

Untrue. If government employees didn't do their jobs, the entire economy would collapse into chaos, and there wouldn't be any tax revenue at all.

Arguments like yours only work if you imagine the government's contribution of law and order and public service being provided by acts of God, or benevolent fairies or something.

The government could contact those jobs out and get all the same work done for less money

First of all, untrue. Look at anything where third party companies are involved compared to direct government employees, and you'll find it always costs more, all due to the profit taken by the private company. That's why student loans have been taken away from the banks as middlemen.

Secondly, irrelevant even if it was true; it would still be the government spending resources to get a result, and your argument, if valid, would hold true either way. It doesn't, therefore it's NOT valid.

So what you're saying is that government doing a job should cost less than having that same job done by the private sector because of the profit motive? What's amusing is that you SHOULD be right about that but because the government is so inherently inefficient it's actually the exact opposite. The private sector works faster and better BECAUSE of the profit motive. If they take twice as long and cost three times as much...like most government projects...then they quickly find themselves filing for bankruptcy. Government doesn't have that pressure on them because it's not their money they are wasting...it's ours.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

But those taxes do not contribute to the net tax revenue of the country because the money you pay in taxes was already taken from the private sector.

They do too contribute, my taxes go to SS, Medicare, etc and with my wages I buy things from the private sector who in turn put that money back into the economy when they pay taxes so what the hell are you talking about?

Another dense as ******* concrete government hack.

If 100% of your pay comes from taxes then the government takes some of that money from you after it was taken from me the money taken from you does not increase the government net tax revenue.

And as far as government workers being more qualified to to sweep floors, clean toilets and rake leaves or collect tolls or deliver the mail, you're sadly mistaken

And tell me how taking my money and giving it to you to spend contributes more to the economy than if I kept it and spent it myself.

Sometimes it's hard to press on in the face of such complete misunderstanding of how govt. taxation, the economy and simple math work. I praise your effort fro trying to educate someone that can't realize that private sector tax payers pay their salary. Units go in, but none come out. Public sector jobs are economically nonproductive.

It just wont sink in for them, Skull. Good try though.