Jauronimo Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 (edited) thats really not true. A Govenment paid employee can take they money and invest an grow rich if they know what their doing... and in turn pay more taxes and spend that wealth over time... to consider Government employment to always being a losing proposition for taxpayers is pretty shortsighted.... If your argument is there are too many employees and lavish benefits in many braches of Government that shoft form the private sector investment then that can be esily argued. Time value of money. Had the government not taken my money in the form of taxes I could have invested that money right now, grown rich and paid more taxes. Arguing a scenario where taking my tax dollars, giving 60% of that to the next guy as salary, so that he can invest his after tax (or pre-tax) dollars and grow rich, as a net positive is an asinine argument. Edited August 22, 2013 by Jauronimo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Time value of money. Had the government not taken my money in the form of taxes I could have invested that money right now, grown rich and paid more taxes. Arguing a scenario where taking my tax dollars, giving 60% of that to the next guy as salary, so that he can invest his after tax (or pre-tax) dollars and grow rich, as a net positive is an asinine argument. Not to mention the velocity of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 The government employs people who are then paid with tax dollars (minus a considerable percentage which is consumed in bureaucratic expense). There is no net wealth creation. Government as job creator is taking $5 out of your left pocket and then putting $4 back in your left pocket. Are you suggesting that money disappears out of the economy when government creates a job? The answer we were looking for is: "demand". The government cannot create jobs, because it does not generate wealth (government provides services, which consume wealth, and it's necessary infrastructure projects opperate at a loss). What government can choose to do, or not do, is create conditions under which the private sector can prosper, stimulating demand for both goods and labor, which leads to higher productivity and lower rates of employment, those lower rates of unemployment empowering workers whose labor and skills have become naturally scare under favorable economic conditions which leads to an increase in wages and benefits as employers compete for their services. If government taxes a wealthy person and gives the money to a poor person and the poor person uses said money to buy a consumer good the government has created demand...BOOM! See? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Are you suggesting that money disappears out of the economy when government creates a job? If government taxes a wealthy person and gives the money to a poor person and the poor person uses said money to buy a consumer good the government has created demand...BOOM! See? Class Gatormandodgers in Norfolk. Never gets old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Are you suggesting that money disappears out of the economy when government creates a job? If government taxes a wealthy person and gives the money to a poor person and the poor person uses said money to buy a consumer good the government has created demand...BOOM! See? Why do we need the middle man to redistribute wealth so the poor can spend it? Why not just let the "wealthy" keep more and spend it on consumer goods that they seem fit to spend their money on......BOOM! See? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 (edited) Are you suggesting that money disappears out of the economy when government creates a job? If government taxes a wealthy person and gives the money to a poor person and the poor person uses said money to buy a consumer good the government has created demand...BOOM! See? Your position assumes that all investments and expendatures are profitable, and that spending for the sake of spending is wise. You ignore the fact that poor people tend to be, and remain, poor because they do not make sound financial decisions. Any wealth they acquire dissipating quickly. Wealthy individuals, on the other hand, tend to become and remain wealthy because they spend and invest their money wisely. This wise investment generating economic growth. As such, the redistribution of wealth strains opportunity costs, and harms economic growth, weakening demand. Edited August 22, 2013 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 It does but it shouldn't and yes we. Ah, liberal democrats: a government by the people, of the people, and for the people. And yet, completely distinct and separate from the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Why do we need the middle man to redistribute wealth so the poor can spend it? Why not just let the "wealthy" keep more and spend it on consumer goods that they seem fit to spend their money on......BOOM! See? You don't know economics very well at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 You don't know economics very well at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Your position assumes that all investments and expendatures are profitable, and that spending for the sake of spending is wise. You ignore the fact that poor people tend to be, and remain, poor because they do not make sound financial decisions. Any wealth they acquire dissipating quickly. Wealthy individuals, on the other hand, tend to become and remain wealthy because they spend and invest their money wisely. This wise investment generating economic growth. As such, the redistribution of wealth strains opportunity costs, and harms economic growth, weakening demand. You are totally changing the subject, this has nothing to do with who manages their money better, it has everything to do with what you originally stated. You do agree that people have to have money to spend it to create demand, correct? Do food stamps create demand for agricultural goods? Awesome argument!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 You don't know economics very well at all No, none at all. See I'm just a Chef. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 No, none at all. See I'm just a Chef. How many toasters does a rich person want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Do food stamps create demand for agricultural goods? Probably not as efficiently as food offered up by charity organizations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 You don't know economics very well at all Ironic. You do not appear to understand grammar. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Probably not as efficiently as food offered up by charity organizations. Ok, fine, so government does create demand, thank you! Ironic. You do not appear to understand grammar. . Another great argument, well thought out and on point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 You are totally changing the subject, this has nothing to do with who manages their money better, it has everything to do with what you originally stated. You do agree that people have to have money to spend it to create demand, correct? Do food stamps create demand for agricultural goods? a) It has everything to do with who manages their money better, as your model completely discards the concept of a heathy economy which is constantly generating future demand. b) having money doesn't create a demand for food, it simply manipulates the marketplace for food. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Ok, fine, so government does create demand, thank you! How did the government create demand in my example? If you say government had a hand in these people's finanacial situation I might just agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 a) It has everything to do with who manages their money better, as your model completely discards the concept of a heathy economy which is constantly generating future demand. b) having money doesn't create a demand for food, it simply manipulates the marketplace for food. Units consumed and demand are interchangeable concepts. Just ask Gatorman who is apparently an authority on economics and finance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 when the government taxes, they are taking money directly out of the economy. all that money that could have been spent on other things never sees the light of day.....it just goes straight into the government coffers. money that getthe s paid to federal employees does make its way back into the economy, but only after a large portion of it is spent being handled by the bureaucrats that redistribute that money. it's an extremely inefficient way to return tax money to the economy. that money ends up back in the hand of Federal Employee salaries, spent on housing, consumables, etc. How is that any different than regular private employment, if the Government job in question is actually useful/needed? I woudl argue that Government's direct funding of research and new technologies is less productive than Government (again, needed government) employment overall... but that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Units consumed and demand are interchangeable concepts. Just ask Gatorman who is apparently an authority on economics and finance. I have never been less surprised by anything than discovering that gatorman doesn't understand the difference between a price-consumption curve and a demand curve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts