- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 6, 2013 at 2:23 am #780375
hooper1961Memberactually i do not support public dollars for sports facilities JoB. where did you get this idea? i support public dollars for infrastructure and education.
kgdlg the Daniel Patrick Moynihan was not intended to have anything to do with race. it simply is a report that without a nuclear family economic progress is hindered. this is not a race issue at all; it is a issue for all people.
January 6, 2013 at 2:49 am #780376
miwsParticipantNo, DBP, I will not give hoop a break.
He long ago earned the disdain that I, and presumably others have toward him.
hoop, maybe JoB, I, and perhaps others got the idea that you support public dollars for sports facilities, because you rarely bitch about that, but you harp on endlessly, and repeat, repeat, repeat, your animosity of the less fortunate folks.
Also, hoop, regarding the Moynihan reference, that is obviously a C&P job, without a cite to its source.
Mike
January 6, 2013 at 2:54 am #780377
hooper1961Membermiws – you simply can’t admit it when the hoop provides back up data.
you can google Daniel Patrick Moynihan and look it up yourself. it was controversial then but from what I see he was very correct.
January 6, 2013 at 3:12 am #780378
miwsParticipantBut there is a WSB rule in regards to C&P’ing/quoting other websites.
Plus, if you took the time to look it up, what’s so damn hard about doing a quick C&P of the source?
January 6, 2013 at 4:23 am #780379
JoBParticipanthoop
if you don’t support public dollars for sports facilities..
why don’t you use them as an example of the public waste of dollars?
i haven’t heard you refer to the stadiums that cater to well healed sports fans as rat holes..
but that is how you speak of social programs
January 6, 2013 at 4:55 am #780380
hooper1961MemberJoB it is a public waste of tax dollars to build stadiums for millionaire players and billionaire owners
January 6, 2013 at 7:43 pm #780381
JoBParticipanthoop..
i agree with you
have you ever wondered how many homeless people we could house and feed and set back on the path that includes employment with what we pay to subsidize for profit sporting ventures?
what would those same dollars create if applied to the infrastructure?
you want to take pennies away from people who don’t have the income to live indoors or feed themselves but are strangely silent when it comes to the millions or billions or trillions of public dollars given to for profit ventures…
penny wise.. pound foolish.
January 6, 2013 at 8:10 pm #780382
hooper1961MemberJoB – as i have stated numerous times I support investment in infrastructure (roads, water, sewer, electric transmission lines). the $30 billion being squandered on unemployment would be much better spent on building something! YES
It is such a public waste to have able bodied/minded folks not working. Employed productive people is in everyone’s best interest. Investing in infrastructure would be a good use of public dollars. Increasing the gasoline use fee to pay for roads should be a no brainer.
January 8, 2013 at 4:35 am #780383
redblackParticipantthe hoop: we have more people than jobs right now.
sorry.
please find someone else to pillory.
try clyde hill or medina.
kthxbye.
January 8, 2013 at 5:20 am #780384
hooper1961Memberits called investing in infrastructure , not handouts. the $30,000,000,000 being givin to unemployed people. what is wrong with getting some productive work from these folks?
January 8, 2013 at 6:41 pm #780385
JoBParticipanthoop..
and how much are we handing out to the American corporations that paid no tax last year?
I am thinking that the American people should get something in exchange for paying them to invest overseas..
unemployment is the real problem and until we change our policies so that it makes it more profitable for American companies to employ American workers on American soil we aren’t doing ourselves any favors.
January 8, 2013 at 6:58 pm #780386
hooper1961MemberJoB as i have said many times i do not support corporate subsidies
January 8, 2013 at 8:34 pm #780387
TanDLParticipantIt is the job of the unemployed to find work. Maybe in your world the unemployed are sitting around collecting UE checks and drinking beer, but in my world they are looking for a job. They are sending out resumes, searching job sites, making calls and even walking in places looking for work. Looking for a job is (and should be) a full-time job. And it’s an ego bruising job these days too, with rejection more the norm than acceptance. I have a son who was just laid off and he’s working his tail off trying to find another job because his UE check is barely going to pay rent and utilities. This is hardly a free or fun ride.
January 8, 2013 at 9:32 pm #780388
HMC RichParticipantAnd it is so hard to do. Send a resume to three different places a week. Then go online, click a few boxes and wait for your check.
It is easy for some (I said some, not all)to game the system.
I have been impressed with our state’s Unemployment Department. I rarely claim, although I have when it is particularly difficult. They can be very efficient.
They can also screw you if you do not understand the process. Be careful. You could owe thousands of dollars if you cheat or do not understand the proper way to file and report your wages. I have a few acquaintances who messed up.
I too am not in favor of corporate subsidies. I do want everyone to pay the proper amount. You will notice I didn’t say “fair” because life is not fair. In fact, I want to close all loopholes, meaning corporate and private, drop the tax rates to a reasonable but equitable level and let business and government do their job. The people we elected put these loopholes and subsidies in the tax code etc. They can change it too.
I am also for building infrastructure. Good Lord, we need to have sound infrastructure to reasonably function. I am happy to pay for good roads, nice schools, nice libraries and parks. I do not, need to see salmon sculptures on the freeway overpasses. If private people want to contribute art, I am fine with that. Been out to Eastgate on I-90. Nice Metal Fish. Why? It wasn’t necessary.
I don’t mind reasonable taxation. It is necessary to our society. We don’t mind paying a bit more if it is reasonably efficient and there is not too much waste.
But there are areas where the Federal Government should not be needed and frankly parts of State Government too.
January 22, 2013 at 3:49 pm #780389
miwsParticipantJanuary 22, 2013 at 4:03 pm #780390
JoBParticipantfrom miws link
“Led by the GOP, the last Congress cut spending by $3.6 trillion. If the International Monetary Fund’s economists are correct, our gross domestic product (GDP) will shrink by $5.4 trillion as a result.”
so the right thinking is that we can cut another 400 million and shrink our GDP by another 1.2 trillion…
how many jobs will that cost?
January 23, 2013 at 12:24 am #780391
hooper1961MemberBorrowing money to spend on investment/infrastructure is one thing; long term capital investment. However spending borrowed money on consumption (operating budget) is a whole different story. Borrowing for first item makes sense and for the second item it does not.
January 23, 2013 at 12:45 am #780392
DBPMember“Led by the GOP, the last Congress cut spending by $3.6 trillion. If the International Monetary Fund’s economists are correct, our gross domestic product (GDP) will shrink by $5.4 trillion as a result.”
so the right thinking is that we can cut another 400 million and shrink our GDP by another 1.2 trillion…
This is an oversimplification. It assumes that every dollar spent generates a net productive gain* of more than a dollar in GDP. That is almost certainly not true, especially when you calculate debt servicing into the equation.
Any individual dollar of government spending could represent a net gain or a net loss to the economy over time, depending upon what it’s being spent on. The trick is to identify investments that are most productive and spend more on those, while spending less on the wasteful stuff. (This supports what hooper is saying.)
Under this “wise spending” model it would be theoretically possible to cut the budget now and have the GDP rise as a result in the long run. As long as the cuts are made wisely.
***********************
*And when I say “net productive gain” I mean a gain that produces rational job growth over the long term. Building missiles and cleaning up oil spills both add to the GDP, for example, but they do not produce as many jobs down the line as spending on infrastructure projects generally does.
January 23, 2013 at 2:08 am #780393
JoBParticipantDBP
“*And when I say “net productive gain” I mean a gain that produces rational job growth over the long term. Building missiles and cleaning up oil spills both add to the GDP, for example, but they do not produce as many jobs down the line as spending on infrastructure projects generally does.”
oversimplified…
depending upon how long those “temporary” projects last, they can create a need for housing and small businesses that can survive the project
January 23, 2013 at 3:55 am #780394
hooper1961MemberJoB – building missiles is like DBP says does not lead to long term productive gain. and people that feed on this type of work are better off feeding off real productive work such as constructing a new bridge that provides good work and can significantly reduce travel times et al; on-going benefit
January 23, 2013 at 3:48 pm #780395
JoBParticipanthoop..
There is no land of should.
What exists is this world where at this moment in time people who want to work go without jobs.
you can deny that reality all you want to
but it won’t change it.
blaming people because they can’t find work won’t change their reality
but denying them benefits because jobs don’t exist will make it pretty difficult for them to feed themselves or put a roof over their head
denying people who would work if they could isn’t any better
and denying retirees the benefits they worked a lifetime to earn is even worse.
temporary work isn’t the ideal
but it beats nothing every time
you know hoop
i don’t mind that you disagree with me
but i really do mind that you do so by denying that a problem exists
i am a solutions kind of gal
and you aren’t offering any
January 24, 2013 at 3:39 am #780396
BikeRiderMemberthere are jobs available for people who truly want to work. granted some of the jobs entail hard work that many americans are allergic too and would rather sit back and collect unemployment.
investing in infrastructure is a win win, it creates good work and builds something for the next generation
January 24, 2013 at 3:53 am #780397
JoBParticipantBikeRider
“there are jobs available for people who truly want to work. granted some of the jobs entail hard work that many americans are allergic too and would rather sit back and collect unemployment.”
I wish this was true.. but i know people who want to work so badly that they will sign back up with the temp agency that cheated them last time because at least they get the opportunity to work for a few months..
i agree that investing in infrastructure is a good thing..
January 24, 2013 at 3:56 am #780398
BikeRiderMemberfarmers in eastern washington had to scramble to get enough workers to harvest apples last season.
January 24, 2013 at 4:02 am #780399
JoBParticipantBike rider
“farmers in eastern washington had to scramble to get enough workers to harvest apples last season”
seasonal work won’t put or keep a roof over your head.. nor is it likely to come with anything even approaching benefits..
the same can be said of working temp work…
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.