Where are the job bills?

[Flopper]

If I create a job position and hire someone to fill that position, I have created a job. Whether it's working for the government or a construction company it's still a job.

 

[Oddball]

If I create a job position and hire someone to fill that position, I have created a job. Whether it's working for the government or a construction company it's still a job.

Jobs "created" by expanding bureaucracy don't increase economic production....They are, in fact, a net drain upon it.

You flunk econ 101.

 

[The T]

If I create a job position and hire someone to fill that position, I have created a job. Whether it's working for the government or a construction company it's still a job.

But you FORGET the Function of GOVERNMENT...this is WHERE YOU FAIL...miserably.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Cutting Federal spending is a jobs bill.

Really?

Laying off federal workers, reducing the number of federal contracts going to private business/industry, cutting funding going to the states,

how does that create jobs??? That eliminates jobs. That reduces employment.

It may very well be a good thing to do, but the last thing it is is a job creator.

Like I've said, the GOP agenda is job elimination, not job creation - and it might even have merit,

but for chrissakes stop pretending that the GOP's agenda is a stimulus program.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If I create a job position and hire someone to fill that position, I have created a job. Whether it's working for the government or a construction company it's still a job.

Jobs "created" by expanding bureaucracy don't increase economic production....They are, in fact, a net drain upon it.

You flunk econ 101.

A job created to build/repair/improve infrastructure, as one example, both creates a job and adds value to the economy.

 

[Oddball]

Where does the money come for those jobs....The Tooth Fairy?

 

[Big Fitz]

If I create a job position and hire someone to fill that position, I have created a job. Whether it's working for the government or a construction company it's still a job.

Jobs "created" by expanding bureaucracy don't increase economic production....They are, in fact, a net drain upon it.

You flunk econ 101.

A job created to build/repair/improve infrastructure, as one example, both creates a job and adds value to the economy.

So does breaking windows till you look at who the cost then is shifted to.

 

[Big Fitz]

If I create a job position and hire someone to fill that position, I have created a job. Whether it's working for the government or a construction company it's still a job.

No, a construction company and government are not equivalent. A construction company builds a product for a fee from the customer. The trade is voluntary, and employees are paid for their work by someone who chose to pay them for it.

Government has no money except for what it gains through taxation (Fees, levies and fines are still taxes). The people being taxed have no choice in this. So if you create a government job, you must tax more to fund it. What service is provided is not necessarily useful, productive or helpful.

I could slap a million people on the payroll shuffling paper back and forth and create jobs and paying people. But where would the money come from? Taxpayers who can ill afford the increased burden.

 

[Trajan]

Jobs "created" by expanding bureaucracy don't increase economic production....They are, in fact, a net drain upon it.

You flunk econ 101.

A job created to build/repair/improve infrastructure, as one example, both creates a job and adds value to the economy.

So does breaking windows till you look at who the cost then is shifted to.

ha! that reminds me of that old saw, ala Milton Friedman visiting a work site as the Chinese worked on 3 gorges dam.

they had little heavy equipment, just hand tools, shovels wheelbarrows etc..he asked why the dearth of machinery etc..his hosts told him they wanted to employ as many people as possible...his response? then why not give them spoons....

 

[driveby]

the "brackets" issue is a Hannity/Faux N00z inspired, tempest in a teapot. ZZZzzz aside from being off-topic.

Bullshit, Obama knows more about the point guard at Marquette than he does about job creation and governing....

 

[Big Fitz]

A job created to build/repair/improve infrastructure, as one example, both creates a job and adds value to the economy.

So does breaking windows till you look at who the cost then is shifted to.

ha! that reminds me of that old saw, ala Milton Friedman visiting a work site as the Chinese worked on 3 gorges dam.

they had little heavy equipment, just hand tools, shovels wheelbarrows etc..he asked why the dearth of machinery etc..his hosts told him they wanted to employ as many people as possible...his response? then why not give them spoons....

Well... that'd just be SILLY!

Besides, they were probably not being paid a decent wage either. I'd rather pay 1 guy a lot of money to run a bulldozer than 100 men a low wage to break their backs

But that's because I'm a lover of industrialization and increased productivity. Why do you think that no railroad has been entirely hand laid since the transcontinental railroad? Because better ways to do more work have been found.

How about we ban windows and make work for the candle and lightbulb makers?

 

[Trajan]

So does breaking windows till you look at who the cost then is shifted to.

ha! that reminds me of that old saw, ala Milton Friedman visiting a work site as the Chinese worked on 3 gorges dam.

they had little heavy equipment, just hand tools, shovels wheelbarrows etc..he asked why the dearth of machinery etc..his hosts told him they wanted to employ as many people as possible...his response? then why not give them spoons....

Well... that'd just be SILLY!

Besides, they were probably not being paid a decent wage either. I'd rather pay 1 guy a lot of money to run a bulldozer than 100 men a low wage to break their backs

But that's because I'm a lover of industrialization and increased productivity. Why do you think that no railroad has been entirely hand laid since the transcontinental railroad? Because better ways to do more work have been found.

How about we ban windows and make work for the candle and lightbulb makers?

what about all of those leather accouterment makers and manufacturers of equipment to harness horses..wtf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Big Fitz]

ha! that reminds me of that old saw, ala Milton Friedman visiting a work site as the Chinese worked on 3 gorges dam.

they had little heavy equipment, just hand tools, shovels wheelbarrows etc..he asked why the dearth of machinery etc..his hosts told him they wanted to employ as many people as possible...his response? then why not give them spoons....

Well... that'd just be SILLY!

Besides, they were probably not being paid a decent wage either. I'd rather pay 1 guy a lot of money to run a bulldozer than 100 men a low wage to break their backs

But that's because I'm a lover of industrialization and increased productivity. Why do you think that no railroad has been entirely hand laid since the transcontinental railroad? Because better ways to do more work have been found.

How about we ban windows and make work for the candle and lightbulb makers?

what about all of those leather accouterment makers and manufacturers of equipment to harness horses..wtf!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

oh no kidding. I always remember the "Burns goes Bankrupt" episode of The Simpsons.

"Time to invest in the blue chips; "Amalgamated Hay, Acme Horsewhips, The New York Spat Corp. and that new Boston Opera Hat company!"

 

[hortysir]

The government can and does create jobs. Saying government does not is bullshit propaganda, believing it does not is stupidity.

Hell, in the past 2 years, the government has been the LARGEST job creator

 

[Wry Catcher]

It's obvious by the posts in support of the conclusion "Government cannot create jobs" those in support are bereft of any argument to support this conclusion. I suppose they feel it is necessary to make silly, stupid and thoughtless comments since they cannot prove (or even offer evidence) that something they believe to be true cannot be supported by evidence or with examples.

 

[Big Fitz]

It's obvious by the posts in support of the conclusion "Government cannot create jobs" those in support are bereft of any argument to support this conclusion. I suppose they feel it is necessary to make silly, stupid and thoughtless comments since they cannot prove (or even offer evidence) that something they believe to be true cannot be supported by evidence.

Riddle me this Batboy...

Where does government EARN money?

Remember... taxes, fees and fines is taking money by force, not earnings.

 

[Big Fitz]

The government can and does create jobs. Saying government does not is bullshit propaganda, believing it does not is stupidity.

Hell, in the past 2 years, the government has been the LARGEST job creator

And yet we are in the red as a nation. Now by 1.4 trillion this year alone. How many businesses can survive operating in the red this bad or long?

 

[editec]

You're the fool who seems to believe that most, if not all, of the nation's ills can be solved by gubmint programs, not me.

Then again, I'm not the fool who points to one of their very few and justifiably enumerated powers (national defense), as a meta-model of how to create jobs via authoritarian central control.

But please, carry on....You're far more inadvertently amusing than you'll ever realize.

LMAO, yes Odd-Dude you are a fool, a fool who lacks both imagination and creativity, one who relies on an idology of unproven truths usually articulated in one or two sentence idiotgrams, punctuated with personal attacks.
Problem solving requires more than parroting a few cliches.
I used the Navy as an example because I served in the Navy; spend my paltry income in the San Diego businesses near the 32nd St. station. I also posted two other examples - highways and the RR, items you failed to mention because you are dishonest. A liar by omission is still a liar.

Those "unproven truths" brought America from literally nothing to the point of being the world's economic powerhouse in a scant 150 years....All with a central government that largely stayed the hell out of the way and let people solve their own problems, created by men you'd hold in utter contempt were they alive today.

You, like the rest of the right wing ilk on this board, have been seriously misinformed.

In fact much of the development of the US industrial base and economy was as a DIRECT RESULT of government imposing TARIFFS on imported goods.

In fact, the US government practically ran on no other source of revenue for the fist 150 years of operations

Doubt me?

THEN DO SOME READING ON THE HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN ECONOMY, and after you're done, report back to us on what you found, okay?

Because the last thing in the world, I'd want you to think is that what I i'm informing you about is some kind of LIBERAL DELUSION.

You who have been misformed, and by experts in the DISINFORMATION BUSINESS, too.

Wake up and smell the conspiracy, lad.

YOU are its victim and YOU sir, and your clueless right wing cranks, are suffering from a collective and terrible case of STOCKHOLM SYNDROME

 

[Wry Catcher]

It's obvious by the posts in support of the conclusion "Government cannot create jobs" those in support are bereft of any argument to support this conclusion. I suppose they feel it is necessary to make silly, stupid and thoughtless comments since they cannot prove (or even offer evidence) that something they believe to be true cannot be supported by evidence.

Riddle me this Batboy...

Where does government EARN money?

Remember... taxes, fees and fines is taking money by force, not earnings.

Taxes, fees and fines have been authorized by the people's representatives. Not taken by force or coercion. Again, we see a silly, stupid and thoughtless effort.

 

[Big Fitz]

It's obvious by the posts in support of the conclusion "Government cannot create jobs" those in support are bereft of any argument to support this conclusion. I suppose they feel it is necessary to make silly, stupid and thoughtless comments since they cannot prove (or even offer evidence) that something they believe to be true cannot be supported by evidence.

Riddle me this Batboy...

Where does government EARN money?

Remember... taxes, fees and fines is taking money by force, not earnings.

Taxes, fees and fines have been authorized by the people's representatives. Not taken by force or coercion. Again, we see a silly, stupid and thoughtless effort.

Oh, not by force or coercion? Try refusing to pay. What's the result again? Oh that's right. Imprisonment and confiscation.

Again, what does Government do to EARN money?

Related bonus question; What business can imprison or confiscate wealth from a person?