Your Tax Dollars at work

reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by SCSInet
http:///forum/post/3012796
I'm not saying I support this (or any bailout related nonsense for that matter).
I'm saying that all is not as it seems in this case, it's not so cut and dry as "we are using bailout funds to buy a bridge for Microsoft."
I'm also advocating the disdain for anything bailout related. We can get upset about stupid spending project here and stupid spending project there, but honestly... how could the government have spent (or invested as the Obamabots call it) the money that wouldn't have upset someone? The bailout is the cause. Stupid spending projects are merely a symptom.
Well the thing is of all the companies on the planet taxpayers shouldn't be asked to help out it's Microsoft. Their biggest problem is how to spend all the cash on the company books. It might no be as bad if the project was a greater benefit to the general public but I doubt 5% of the use of that bridge will come from non Microsoft employees.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by sickboy
http:///forum/post/3013578
stdreb,
While I agree with some of what you wrote, I disagree with the job creation part.
When our economy is losing jobs like crazy, aren't gov't jobs a good thing? I say so b/c the gov't is very efficient at creating jobs, which is why conversely they are cost inefficient. The private sector is too efficient to be good at creating jobs quickly, but better over the long term. The Dept. of Roads estimates that 41,000 jobs are created per $1 million spent. Granted most of these jobs don't have longevity of more than a couple years, but that is all you need until there is a rebound, correct? And with proper counter-cyclical budget constraints it would not be a burden on future generations (of course this does not/has not existed in our country for 50 years).
Plus, with our marginal propensity to save so low, the money multiplier is very high (of course that is probably to keynesian for you, huh?). Unfortunately a lot of this is skewed through pay off of debt.
There is no way printing money, or taking money from an organization that is actually generating wealth, then giving to an organization that is a non-producer. Can possibly be a a wise choice.
But I'm talking as a whole. Not to the guy who gets a job working as the flag man or whatever. To him it is better.
Well depending on how you really look at it. With a low savings rate, there is even less of a reason for the govt to spend money.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by Coral Keeper
http:///forum/post/3013707
Hmmm.... I wonder if the government would help me pay for my reef tank.... lol

Somebody should write a grant proposal for a Coral Propagation and Sustainability project and see what happens. I could actually see someone getting a grant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top