\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 (edited) http://www.buffalone...icle1014775.ece Edited August 21, 2012 by \GoBillsInDallas/
Duck_dodgers007 Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 http://www.buffalone...icle1014775.ece And that government is the enemy! What an idiot, but so much a typical tea party moron
IDBillzFan Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 And that government is the enemy! What an idiot, but so much a typical tea party moron It's gotta be hard watching it all slip away after a single term.
The Big Cat Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 It's gotta be hard watching it all slip away after a single term. It's gotta be exhausting being the GOP **** talking toadie in chief.
IDBillzFan Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 It's gotta be exhausting being the GOP **** talking toadie in chief. Ahhh, yes, the PeeWee Herman approach to insults. Big surprise there. On the upside, you've managed to write a full sentence without contradicting yourself six times, so I guess that's progress.
Gary M Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 (edited) And that government is the enemy! What an idiot, but so much a typical tea party moron http://www.michiganc...ntial.com/17404 http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/16789 any chance he is correct? Edited August 21, 2012 by Gary M
The Big Cat Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 Ahhh, yes, the PeeWee Herman approach to insults. Big surprise there. On the upside, you've managed to write a full sentence without contradicting yourself six times, so I guess that's progress. I have no idea who that is, old man.
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 http://www.michiganc...ntial.com/17404 http://www.michiganc...ntial.com/16789 any chance he is correct? A 100% chance that he's correct in an economic sense. Government jobs are service jobs, and service jobs consume wealth rather than create it.
/dev/null Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 A 100% chance that he's correct in an economic sense. Government jobs are service jobs, and service jobs consume wealth rather than create it. Some service jobs consume wealth in support of producing wealth. IT support for example. Sometimes you've got to spend money to make money.
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 Some service jobs consume wealth in support of producing wealth. IT support for example. Sometimes you've got to spend money to make money. Support isn't creation. Wealth is only created at the levels of extraction (of resources) and manufacturing (ie. the combining of those resources to create something more valuable).
Duck_dodgers007 Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 Support isn't creation. Wealth is only created at the levels of extraction (of resources) and manufacturing (ie. the combining of those resources to create something more valuable). You are a complete idiot
Gary M Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 A 100% chance that he's correct in an economic sense. Government jobs are service jobs, and service jobs consume wealth rather than create it. And when the service is no longer needed and the union refuses to eliminate the job, Then what is it?
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 (edited) You are a complete idiot OK, hot shot. Define wealth in economic terms relating to utility, and inherent commodity value. Then explain how a barrista increases the intrinsic value of a cup of coffee. And when the service is no longer needed and the union refuses to eliminate the job, Then what is it? Destructive waste. Edited August 21, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker
OCinBuffalo Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 And that government is the enemy! What an idiot, but so much a typical tea party moron Too bad for you: it's been exhaustively documented that the TEA party on average is: 1. more successful 2. more educated 3. more intelligent than both the OWS clowns....and Democrats in general, on average. So...if the TEA party people are morons....what does that make OWS/Democrats? (There goes another one...and typical? There's no such thing as a "typical" TEA party member, short of the above, accurate charateristics) The lame mischaraterizations of the TEA party, in order: first it was racist, then it was violent, then it was dead, then it was irrelevant, and now...they are only stupid? So, basically you(MSNBC) shoot high, and progressively aim lower as each false characterization doesn't work out? Pathetic. What's next below stupid? Mean? Oh, don't tell me, I know: anti-gay, right? Or is it: selfish? Given this history...how can anyone take what you have to say about the TEA party seriously? Honestly? It's exactly as LA said...you, and apparently the Big Cat, are feeling it starting to "slip"..aren't you? (See: lashing out). Obama's lies and obvious incompetence are way worse for you...than however you feel Bush "victimized" you, aren't they? However, even if you can't see that yet....rest assurred, the TEA party will help you get there, regardless of who wins the election. I'll be here too...helping you to learn not to be suckered so easily.
GG Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 Support isn't creation. Wealth is only created at the levels of extraction (of resources) and manufacturing (ie. the combining of those resources to create something more valuable). You really should get your head out of a textbook. there are plentry of service jobs that create wealth. Does McDonald's sell a single hamburger without someone taking the order? IBM'S market cap is due largely to its services business and not hardware.
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 21, 2012 Posted August 21, 2012 You really should get your head out of a textbook. there are plentry of service jobs that create wealth. Does McDonald's sell a single hamburger without someone taking the order? IBM'S market cap is due largely to its services business and not hardware. /facepalm Overvaluations of service sector businesses above their actual real capital commodity and real infrastructure holdings don't translate to wealth. Dollars aren't even wealth, they are fluctuating representations of wealth backed by nothing but the commoditization of future labor (debt). Tell me, how much is debt worth to you?
GG Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 /facepalm Overvaluations of service sector businesses above their actual real capital commodity and real infrastructure holdings don't translate to wealth. Dollars aren't even wealth, they are fluctuating representations of wealth backed by nothing but the commoditization of future labor (debt). Tell me, how much is debt worth to you? Thanks for the textbook explanation. That and 50 cents won't buy you a cup of coffee anymore. The world doesn't work based on quack economic theories of "real " values. It works on an exchange of goods and services at the market value at the time of the transaction, and the parties are the ones who set that price The inflated value of services to you is the real value to someone else, because thankfully economists still don't understand human behavior.
DC Tom Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 Thanks for the textbook explanation. That and 50 cents won't buy you a cup of coffee anymore. The world doesn't work based on quack economic theories of "real " values. It works on an exchange of goods and services at the market value at the time of the transaction, and the parties are the ones who set that price The inflated value of services to you is the real value to someone else, because thankfully economists still don't understand human behavior. Or, to put it empirically...the slaves created value through the service of picking the cotton. Else, they wouldn't have been slaves.
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 (edited) Thanks for the textbook explanation. That and 50 cents won't buy you a cup of coffee anymore.What is the exchange rate of that 50 cents relative to a basket of material goods and commodities? You're aware of those exchange rate between cents and coffee changing, correct? What coauses those changes? The world doesn't work based on quack economic theories of "real " values. It works on an exchange of goods and services at the market value at the time of the transaction, and the parties are the ones who set that price Completely irrelevant to the conversation. The inflated value of services to you is the real value to someone else...I'll ask again, and you specifically, how much intrinsic value does a barista add to a cup of coffee? because thankfully economists still don't understand human behavior.Marcoeconomists don't because they disregard the individual human micro-transactions which make up the aggregate in favor of the aggregate itself. Micro-economists do, because it's all they pay attention to. The field itself is called praxeology. Or, to put it empirically...the slaves created value through the service of picking the cotton. Else, they wouldn't have been slaves. In economic terms, what the slaves did was extraction labor, not service labor. The difference being that the combination of the resource and the labor created something of greater intrinsic value than the resource itself. Not all labor is of equal value, nor is all labor service. Edited August 22, 2012 by TakeYouToTasker
Duck_dodgers007 Posted August 22, 2012 Posted August 22, 2012 OK, hot shot. Define wealth in economic terms relating to utility, and inherent commodity value. Then explain how a barrista increases the intrinsic value of a cup of coffee. Destructive waste. Explain to me how I would even get a cup of coffee if the government didn't built ports to import it, or stop pirates from stealing it, or stop organized crime from bleeding businesses to death, or build roads to transport the coffee? The government is the very foundation of our wealth, it allows for commerce to take place. I'd really like to hear your definition of wealth in terms of utility. You understand the government holds wealth also? In economic terms, what the slaves did was extraction labor, not service labor. The difference being that the combination of the resource and the labor created something of greater intrinsic value than the resource itself. Not all labor is of equal value, nor is all labor service. Who's economic terms? There are no single set of "economic terms," and for you to imply there is only shows how ignorant you are. I'm guessing you are a glue sniffer? Are you?
Recommended Posts