quote:

---

Originally posted by hammr7:
Your claim is that ANY job created by government, at any level, is a job TAKEN from industry.

I'm arguing that some level of peace and safety, constructed and enforced by GOVERNMENT, allows all private enterprises to prosper, because they know the allowances and constraints of the environment in which they will compete.

In essence I am claiming a great deal of potential and actual synergy between business and government in terms of number of jobs and overall profitability. That synergy can be reduced or eliminated by activities and power grabs by either side, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, only that their are powerful forces which seek to eliminate it for their own personal advantages.

More specifically to your Libertarian views; I've worked in nations that have less "government" and less oversight. Freeing me of government regulation simply replaced a standard set of rules with a chaotic (and often dangerous) set of alternatives. Rather than a boon for my business they were a hardship, since I wasn't in the mood for graft and other types of business conspiracies. And unfortunately such activities were just the tip of the iceberg.

---

Again, you've failed to show me or anyone else here where i said that all government should be disbanded. While I do typically argue in favor of smaller government, I have acknowledged many times throughout these threads that some regulation is necessary- increased regulation of the health care industry is part of my proposal to reform health care, a plan I've pushed numerous times throughout multiple versions of this post, and I've also talked about increasing taxes on gasoline to discourage its use.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranderas:
Government is not capable of creating jobs. Any jobs it makes the illusion of creating are lost from taxpaying businesses who can't afford to hire as many employees due to the loss of money available to them.

---

In command economies, where the government controls everything (or a major subset of everything) you can argue that every job is a government job. In China, a majority of all jobs are government controlled. Are they phantoms? Are they thoroughly unproductive simply because the government is the boss?

Mr. Chavez has managed to nationalize quite a number of industries in Venezuela. I have no doubt that in any of those industries that are currently expanding the government is "creating" jobs.

In our own government, there are easy examples, such as the three major components of the US Government.

There are numerous other examples of government initiated, shepherded and financially supported research projects. These governmental initiatives are able to take on and coordinate massive projects that the private sector is unwilling or unable to tackle.

O Dr. Paul.

quote:

---

Originally posted by super324:
Because we share many common Genes? And those two species go through generations faster than humans? Its not exactly that hard to understand.

---

Humans and fish and fruitflies share many common genes?  If you say so.

quote:

---

Because you're going on the assumption that they are already doing something illegal. 4th amendment. You have no probable cause to think that these people are on drugs.

---

Then aren't the rights of those on parole and probation, unless convicted of a drug/alchohol offense, are being violated when they are drug tested without cause?

quote:

---

Through selective breeding "good" genes and canceling out "bad" genes. Mississippi—a state that produces around $245 million worth of catfish each year—are intent on selecting catfish broodstock with superior genetic potential. By unlocking the secrets of the catfish genome, they hope to find favorable natural variations within genes that control important traits such as lean growth, carcass yield, and improved survival in commercial ponds. Same can be said for NC.

---

Fair enough, but however usefull catfish, fruitfly, and blueberry genetics research is or isn't, we're in a recession.  And in a recession, catfish, fruitflies, and blueberries (and presidential libraries) DON'T GET ANY MONEY!!!!!  There are other, more pressing issues that should get that money.  I have no problem with money going towards science when we're not broke, but since we are, unless that science will immediatly bennefit the majority of this country, it gets no money.  When it comes to money for scientific research, disease, development of FCV technology and cellulosic ethanol get that money.  Not catfish, blueberries, and fruitflies.  

Earmark priorities (IMO, and in no particular order):
1) Infrastructure
-roads, bridges
-increasing/developing "green" energy (FCV, cellulosic ethanol, nuclear, etc)
-increasing output of domestic oil (just think how much tax dollars CA would get off those rigs) because we need it until everything else is cheaply available to the masses

2) National Defense (Military, FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, etc)

3) "Benefits" (VA, SS, Medicare)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranderas:
Government is not capable of creating jobs. Any jobs it makes the illusion of creating are lost from taxpaying businesses who can't afford to hire as many employees due to the loss of money available to them.

---

Do you mean government as a whole can't create jobs, or specific governemnt agencies?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bugger:
Think for yourself

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skizzikmonger:
Humans and fish and fruitflies share many common genes? �If you say so.

---

We do. Its a scientific fact, even if you don't want to believe it. All life on this planet is carbon-based. All higher forms of life share the same genetic compounds which are mixed and matched to produce uniquely different species. Insects and fish don't share as many exact genes as mammals, but the percentages of shared genes are much higher than most people realize.

quote:

---

Then aren't the rights of those on parole and probation, unless convicted of a drug/alchohol offense, are being violated when they are drug tested without cause?

---

If you knew the law, then you would realize your statement is absurd. Those who have been found guilty of a crime lose privileges that normal citizens have. Some of these privileges can be near-permanent (right to possess a gun, right to vote), even if their original crime didn't involve weapons or election fraud.

For those released on probation or parole, their release is often contingent upon agreeing to a series of limitations (where you can be, when you can be out, who you associate with, being drug and alcohol free, etc.). Those limitations can be checked at any time, and failure to live up to any one of them can revoke your "privilege" of being out on parole or probation.

quote:

---

Fair enough, but however�usefull catfish, fruitfly, and blueberry genetics research is or isn't, we're in a recession. �And in a recession, catfish, fruitflies, and blueberries (and presidential libraries) DON'T GET ANY MONEY!!!!! �There are other, more pressing issues that should get that money. �I have no problem with money going towards science when we're not broke, but since we are, unless that science will immediatly bennefit the majority of this country, it gets no money. �When it comes to money for scientific research, disease, development of FCV technology and cellulosic ethanol get that money. �Not catfish, blueberries, and fruitflies. �

---

If we stop investing in research during recessions, then we lose the ability to generate new businesses that can lead us out of recession. I'll grant that choices need to be made, but unfortunately throwing huge amounts of money at a research project doesn't necessarily make it happen faster. If you don't have enough experts in the field, then they extra money is wasted on less competent research.

quote:

---

Earmark priorities (IMO, and in no particular order):
1) Infrastructure
-roads, bridges
-increasing/developing "green" energy (FCV, cellulosic ethanol, nuclear, etc)
-increasing output of domestic oil (just think how much tax dollars CA would get off those rigs) because we need it until everything else is cheaply available to the masses

2) National Defense (Military, FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, etc)

3) "Benefits" (VA, SS, Medicare)

---

I'm glad you considered things like social security, given that it has been the biggest money maker for the government over the last three decades. All the crap about the need to cut benefits in this program has to do with Congress realizing they will soon be asked to pay back some of the trillions in excess contributions they have taken in and wasted (primarily on tax cuts for the rich).

Medicare, however, needs work fast. The program is hamstrung by ridiculous rules (can't go after fraud, can't negotiate less-than-list-prices like private health insurers, etc.). As the farce of the last 10 months showed, powerful lobbying forces, wishing to maintain their enormous profit margins, will support gridlock and the status quo until the program implodes. That day of reckoning is not far off.

The problem with any of your components in item #1 is that they are all long-lead-time items. For example, if you want to repair a bridge, you need to identify what must be done, get all the necessary permits, put it out for public bid, negotiate final contracts, hire actual construction workers and amass equipment and materials, and finally start the work. This is why all the money for infrastructure improvements from last year's stimulus bill are only now starting to flow (you NEVER pay people before work actually starts).

quote:

---

Originally posted by hammr7:
Then I'll get a bit more basic. Government can, and does, create jobs. Arguments can be made that they don't do it as efficiently (and there are examples both for and against this position), but there should be no doubt that Government creates jobs.

In command economies, where the government controls everything (or a major subset of everything) you can argue that every job is a government job. In China, a majority of all jobs are government controlled. Are they phantoms? Are they thoroughly unproductive simply because the government is the boss?

Mr. Chavez has managed to nationalize quite a number of industries in Venezuela. I have no doubt that in any of those industries that are currently expanding the government is "creating" jobs.

In our own government, there are easy examples, such as the three major components of the US Government.

There are numerous other examples of government initiated, shepherded and financially supported research projects. These governmental initiatives are able to take on and coordinate massive projects that the private sector is unwilling or unable to tackle.

So I think if you wish to argue that government doesn't "create" jobs, you'd better define your argument further.

---

The private sector is only unwilling to tackle projects that are unprofitable or not worth pursuing in the first place.

Every job government "creates" is jobs lost in the industry through taxes. There's absolutely no way around that fact.

It's not necessarily a bad thing for government to do this, though. The core functions of government- which do NOT include welfare acts like skizzik suggests- do need to be funded. We need a national defense and to protect the private rights of citizens. We also need to protect and regulate certain industries to some degree, such as banking and medicine. That's it, though. Government should participate in no further activities than these because to do so is detrimental to the well-being of its citizens.

Specifically, I take great issue with targeted tax breaks to any entity in an effort to "create jobs" due to where the tax money is coming from. In Michigan, the money for targeted tax breaks to attract large corporations are taken from a small business tax. So an extra tax that makes it unattractive to start a small business- and really, small businesses are the core of the economy- is used to try to bribe large businesses. So by making it harder for a small business to start up, my state acknowledges that we're not an economically ideal place to start a business. They steal from us to give to businesses who might just come here anyway if we could reduce our tax burden overall and lowering costs. The whole union state thing doesn't really help, though...

quote:

---

Originally posted by skizzikmonger:
Humans and fish and fruitflies share many common genes?  If you say so.

---

Him and virtually everyone in the scientific community who commonly use mice, fruit flies, and other organisms.

Although fruit flies are clearly very different, the number of shared genes is surprisingly high:

quote:

---

BBC News:

Fruit flies share nearly 60% of human genes and are studied by thousands of scientists around the world. The reason is that fruit flies and humans use the same or similar genes to develop into adults. And the short life cycle of the fly makes it an ideal subject for genetic experiments. Link.

---

It's akin to how a mechanic can understand how your Ford truck works because he's worked on a Toyota truck. Your truck even shares a lot of similarities to a Toyota Corolla, despite the obvious differences in shape, size, and function on the outside. However, some basic concepts of the engine and vital parts common to most automobiles mean that understanding one vehicle lets one understand how others work. I just helped one of my friends replace parts in his lights despite never having worked on that model and make; lights tend to work the same way whether it's a Ford or Saturn or Toyota. The oil filter on your car might be a different one you buy from your local auto parts store than the one that I purchase for my car, but the overall design is probably remarkably similar, and with a little bit of discovery, if you know how to change the oil on your car, you could probably change the oil in my car. You simply need to understand that the oil filter is located in a slightly different place.

Humans and fish share about 42% of their genes. By studying the genes that are the same, you can make scientific discoveries that carry over to humans.

The basic idea, ironically (after you complain about the money spent on these projects), is that by using fish and fruit flies and mice, researchers spend LESS money on their research and develop results more quickly - the time to spawn a new generation of these animals is far less than that of primates and the cost to buy flies, mice, and fish is far less than that of the cost to buy primates for tests.

Mice are about 80-85% similar to humans.

Even worms share a significant number of similar genes, leading to applications of cell regeneration, cancer research, and other mutations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranderas:
Every job government "creates" is jobs lost in the industry through taxes. There's absolutely no way around that fact.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TheMidnightBomber:
This argument would almost make sense if the government didn't spend more money than it has. Almost. There are things private industry doesn't do that the government does, like building highways. It also is not motivated by profit, so in theory there is more money budgeted for hirings, particularly since nobody gets multi-million dollar bonuses.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranderas:
The private sector is only unwilling to tackle projects that are unprofitable or not worth pursuing in the first place.

---

The current US Marketplace is filled with companies that won't commit to ANYTHING that requires long term investments. There are a few glaring exceptions, but for the most part the Wall Street mentality is very myopic in only caring about the next quarter or the next year. The tend to punish companies investing for the long haul.

Unfortunately, great technology gains have always required a push from government. Our entire electronics industry, semiconductor industry, materials science industry, even the Internet itself, have been spurred by Military contracts and government supported projects in basic research. NASA in the 60's and 70's and Star Wars in the 80's are a few notable examples.

quote:

---

Every job government "creates" is jobs lost in the industry through taxes. There's absolutely no way around that fact.

---

So Energy consortiums like the Tennessee Vally Authority are taxing their customers? If so, I'd like some of those taxes, since their energy costs are much lower than mine. The following info is from the TVA website.

How is TVA funded?

TVA has revenues of over $9 billion a year from sales to its three customer groups. It receives no public tax dollars but finances all of its programs, including those for environmental protection, integrated river management, and economic development, through power sales and the sale of bonds in the financial markets. The total amount of outstanding bonds and banknotes represents TVA’s debt.

How do TVA’s rates compare with those of other power companies?

TVA electricity costs less than most electricity produced around the nation. For residents in the TVA region, the average cost of one kilowatt-hour — the amount of electricity it takes to burn ten 100-watt light bulbs for one hour — is 6.4 cents, while the national average is 8.5 cents.

quote:

---

Originally posted by hammr7:

So Energy consortiums like the Tennessee Vally Authority are taxing their customers? If so, I'd like some of those taxes, since their energy costs are much lower than mine. The following info is from the TVA website.

How is TVA funded?

TVA has revenues of over $9 billion a year from sales to its three customer groups. It receives no public tax dollars but finances all of its programs, including those for environmental protection, integrated river management, and economic development, through power sales and the sale of bonds in the financial markets. The total amount of outstanding bonds and banknotes represents TVA’s debt.

How do TVA’s rates compare with those of other power companies?

TVA electricity costs less than most electricity produced around the nation. For residents in the TVA region, the average cost of one kilowatt-hour — the amount of electricity it takes to burn ten 100-watt light bulbs for one hour — is 6.4 cents, while the national average is 8.5 cents.

---

Word. Here in Texas they decided they were gonna be all private sector and **** and decided it would be totally awesome if they deregulated the market. End result: higher prices for everyone, with the only notable exceptions being if you happen to be one of the few cities still with municipal energy. Same can be said in California except they ended up with an energy crisis. GO private sector in charge of inelastic goods!

Here at home, the Conservative attack machine is in full swing, trying to distract us from our outrage.

__________________
"I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each. I do not think they will sing to me." -T.S. Eliot

RIP Ari

So... with 12 days to go, we get the emergence of a deal regarding the Buy American provisions. By the time it's ratified, it'll be ten days or less. And what, less than 75$ billion of your 787$ billion stimulus (275$ billion in infrastructure) package?

And in return, we've given the US AND the WTO unfettered access to our municipal and provincial projects for an unspecified length of time? Sounds like a bad deal to me. Isn't this just going to hurt our jobs situation by pushing out Canadian suppliers and the like?

Isn't this the kind of deal that should be debated in Parliament? Isn't it the kind of deal that should have a national discussion? But it's going to be ratified without either?! WTF!? MFWTF?!

Sounds like softwood lumber all over again, only worse. And all for a "positive" headline when the Conservatives are down in the dumps. UGH.

__________________
"I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each. I do not think they will sing to me." -T.S. Eliot

RIP Ari

Down With the People
Blame the childish, ignorant American public—not politicians—for our political and economic crisis.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:
I enjoyed this article and I thought it was thought provoking. Anyone want to discuss it?

Down With the People
Blame the childish, ignorant American public—not politicians—for our political and economic crisis.

http://www.slate.com/id/2243797

---

This is one article I would love to discuss with you sometime on aim.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tranderas:
This is one article I would love to discuss with you sometime on aim.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:
Why not here?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:
I enjoyed this article and I thought it was thought provoking. Anyone want to discuss it?

Down With the People
Blame the childish, ignorant American public—not politicians—for our political and economic crisis.

http://www.slate.com/id/2243797

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by AlmasterGM:
I strongly agree with the this article. The majority of Americans know incredibly little about how government and the fields that surround it operate, yet the continuously demand perfect results. We don't live in a utopia. Sacrifices have to be made if there are to be results.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlasteredDragon:
I enjoyed this article and I thought it was thought provoking. Anyone want to discuss it?

Down With the People
Blame the childish, ignorant American public—not politicians—for our political and economic crisis.

http://www.slate.com/id/2243797

---

I thought this was a great article, but I don't think it was entirely accurate. It's easy to blame any one single group for all the problems but I really think it's a vicious circle. The "Ignorant Public" elect politicians with a "live-for-the-today" mentality, mostly based on the information given to them by the media, who, acting in their own self-interest, create hoopla and scandal which distract people from the real news. The majority of the public do not have time to do their own research on politicians, so their information has to come from the media. The politicians give the public the idea that they can have their cake and eat it too, when they should be giving it to us straight, but if they do that then the media turns against them.

Is it truly the "public's" fault or just society failing to its own devices?

__________________
Stages of Death: Anger, Denial, Barganing, Depression, Acceptance, Burial, Decay, Haunting, Revenge, Evil Laugh

quote:

---

Originally posted by Battle_of_Twits:
I thought this was a great article, but I don't think it was entirely accurate. It's easy to blame any one single group for all the problems but I really think it's a vicious circle. The "Ignorant Public" elect politicians with a "live-for-the-today" mentality, mostly based on the information given to them by the media, who, acting in their own self-interest, create hoopla and scandal which distract people from the real news. The majority of the public do not have time to do their own research on politicians, so their information has to come from the media. The politicians give the public the idea that they can have their cake and eat it too, when they should be giving it to us straight, but if they do that then the media turns against them.

Is it truly the "public's" fault or just society failing to its own devices?

---

So instead we point to the impotence of minority governments, glorify the days of majorities, and forget that all it takes to get stuff done--even with a minority in Parliament--is a modicum of co-operation. And we never bother to demand it of our elected representatives.

So yeah. I place the majority of the blame on the public's shoulders, and I don't doubt it's any different down south. Not everyone can be very intelligent, but that's not what wanted, needed, or required: what is needed is responsibility, and a willingness to engage in constructive discussions.

I saw Obama's address to the Republicans in full the other day, and I have to say that I was extremely impressed once more, despite my flagging opinion of your president. I just hope that we can take a leaf from his book, buck up, and start acting like adults once more.

__________________
"I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each. I do not think they will sing to me." -T.S. Eliot

RIP Ari