{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
originally posted in:Liberty Hub
6/30/2016 7:05:27 AM
7
Because every problem can be solved when we dont spend, right?
Because governemnt spends our money overseas and our corporations dont, right.
Spending gets the economy going. Govetnemnt can and should spend its the shoring up of assets by weathier individuals thats the problem. They store it and dont let it curculate, damaging the economy the middle and lower classes have less spending money then ever before. None of them get a cut of the profits and gains that america has gained for the last 30 years.
Nice way to post btw. If you just said "more government" you know you would get more of those, so you put "spend more" to deter that vote and sway to your favor. You can easily increase governemnt without spending
English
-
[quote]Because governemnt spends our money overseas and our corporations dont, right. [/quote] Huge difference. A corporation spends its own money on its own interests, receiving something in return. The government spends my money on bombs, getting nothing in return. [quote]Spending gets the economy going.[/quote] Spending might. Government spending doesn't, because the government can't magically determine where a certain $1 billion dollars ought to be spent in order to be most efficient. A dairy farmer knows where to invest his money. The trucking company that delivers the milk knows where to invest its money. The consumer that purchases the milk knows where to invest his money. The state can't deprive those people of their money and circulate it more efficiently than they can. [quote] They store it and dont let it curculate, damaging the economy the middle and lower classes have less spending money then ever before. None of them get a cut of the profits and gains that america has gained for the last 30 years.[/quote] That's a common misconception of wealth. You think somebody like Christy Walton made billions of dollars by sitting on her first million? No. Wealth is tied up in assets. Even "stored" wealth is in circulation. It isn't "stored;" it's saved - presumably in a bank. Bank's make their money through interest on loans. The money from those loans comes from people who save. If I store $2000 in a bank, it doesn't stagnate. It gets loaned out for somebody to kickstart their business. Wealthy people don't stuff their mattresses with money, because that's the least productive use of money, and wealthy people aren't necessarily known for being unproductive with their wealth. [quote]Nice way to post btw. If you just said "more government" you know you would get more of those, so you put "spend more" to deter that vote and sway to your favor. You can easily increase governemnt without spending[/quote] You think government employees work for free? Programs fund themselves? That's absurd. Absolutely absurd. An increase in state power is an increase in state funding (or debt, in our case).
-
Corporates spend their money however they damn choose, regardless of how it negatively affects society. I believe trump has a platform on this to bring businesses home for that very reason, correct? (Its like his only intelligent argument) atleast through government i have a percent say of how the money is spent. You think the businesses interest is always the best thing? Tell that to the bees getting killed by pesticide, but the use is so common and profitable the pesticide companies are merging and are trying to use their influence as long as they can to make as much profit as they can, reguardless of what happens to the bees. If their best interest means it will kill me and humanity itself, no thank you Ypu obviously havent heard of tax shelters or shadow banks You obviously dont know the power of making a law either
-
[quote]Corporates spend their money however they damn choose, regardless of how it negatively affects society.[/quote] If a corporation purchases Chinese steel, how is society negatively affected? What could a corporation buy that would negatively effect me, independent of my own action? [quote]Tell that to the bees getting killed by pesticide[/quote] Gonna have to link that. [quote]Ypu obviously havent heard of tax shelters or shadow banks[/quote] I know what both are. Part of the problem is the U.S.'s propensity to double-dip on taxes, and to wrap everything in thirty layers of red tape. Why keep money in a nation that takes it all? [quote]You obviously dont know the power of making a law either[/quote] Laws don't enforce themselves. They don't pass themselves, either. The EPA passes laws all the time, outside the power of the legislative branch.
-
I cant link the PDFs but there are plenty pf scholarly articles on it. Peer reviewed and cited and easy for anyone to find. The best i can post is the link to google scholar to make it even easier. Have you never heard of corporate lobbying for their interests. Reguardless of harm to society. You must not hear about fuel lobbying and fracking going for their interests either. No issues ever get solved by cutting government. No not deficits either because you arent dealing with the underying problems Government was BORN out of the problems with lack if it. Government will never be as you dream unless you go to a minor country. EVERY person on that general election ballot will seek more power once in office.
-
[quote]Have you never heard of corporate lobbying for their interests. Reguardless of harm to society. You must not hear about fuel lobbying and fracking going for their interests either.[/quote] Lobbying isn't the issue. People can give their money and time to whomever they'd like. The problem is that the state has power to sell. If the state can't sell power over other people, then lobbyists can't buy it. [quote]No issues ever get solved by cutting government. No not deficits either because you arent dealing with the underying problems[/quote] Ever? [i]Ever?[/i] There's not one issue that could be solved by less government? Is that to say that everything the government currently does and spends money on is efficient and useful? Ignorant. Federal funds go to such things like exhibits for "Cowboy Poetry" in Elko, Nevada. [i]Federal tax dollars.[/i] You're telling me that eliminating something like this is never the answer? Absurd. Absolutely absurd. What about the 200% increase in the cost of a public education? No waste or inefficiency there, either? (http://www.factcheck.org/2011/03/reids-cowboy-poetry-puffery/) [quote]No not deficits either because you arent dealing with the underying problems[/quote] The underlying problem is that the state spends well beyond its means. Spending more isn't going to accelerate revenue to a point where it overtakes the expenses. The deficit is half a trillion dollars. How many more billions is it going to take until we're making money instead of losing it? At what point can the state remove $1 billion dollars from the economy and turn it into $2 billion dollars? [quote]EVERY person on that general election ballot will seek more power once in office.[/quote] And that's the problem. The cognitive dissonance here is astounding. "The state suffers from corruption, so we need to recognize that it's natural for the state to grow in size and scope."
-
So you use a private theft of public funds as a argument to cut funding to healthcare, education, military(i would cut this but not for a dumb example like that to justify it)? What do you want. More power to the states? State money could have been used for the same sort of act Are you for less government in general (state and federal)? You trust businesses are best? Without government who is to stop companies from dumping wastes into the public water supply and poison your child? Who will pick up your trash every week? Who will ensure your pregnant wife gets enough folic acid in her diet? A city can enact a 1cent sales tax and get the funds to provide public transportation. Government was almost nonexistent then rose theough the crimes and inhumane treatment of citizens under the new industrialized era where no laws exsisted to protect the workers and businesses perversed those under it. You imply the seeking of more power in governement as something inherently corrupt. It isnt, only who you vote in matters. It also gives your vote more power as goverment increases. Atleast if its corrupt i have a vote and can do something about it.
-
[quote]So you use a private theft of public funds as a argument to cut funding to healthcare, education, military(i would cut this but not for a dumb example like that to justify it)?[/quote] No? First of all, "private theft of public funds" is public theft. Lobbying isn't the same thing as having the state wire a few bucks to your account. Lobbying is influencing the state to use its power in your favor. While there's nothing wrong with pleading your case to the state, the problem comes when the state actually abuses that power. Rather than erecting walls between the state and the electorate, it's better to ensure that the state can't abuse its power. You said it yourself, people in office are looking for more power. [quote]What do you want. More power to the states? State money could have been used for the same sort of act[/quote] Federalism is nice. But it's still governmental action. Ideally, we'd see dramatic slashes to government power, funding, and spending. Current spending levels are unsustainable, and there's not enough money in the pockets of the nation to keep it going. [quote]Are you for less government in general (state and federal)? You trust businesses are best? Without government who is to stop companies from dumping wastes into the public water supply and poison your child?[/quote] Bash that strawman - bash it hard. You have a poor understanding of my principles. People still have rights. If somebody poisons your well, they've committed a crime against you. It's still illegal, and we don't need the EPA to torch millions of dollars a year to recognize that it's illegal. [quote]Who will pick up your trash every week? Who will ensure your pregnant wife gets enough folic acid in her diet? A city can enact a 1cent sales tax and get the funds to provide public transportation.[/quote] This is typical authoritarian-speak. "If the state doesn't do it, who will?" So now I have to quote Bastiat, again. "Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all." News flash. People don't need to have their wealth taken from them in order to accomplish these things. Your sales tax example is adorable. Don't act as if you're asking for a few small state duties. You're actively defending a half trillion dollar deficit. Furthermore, the state doesn't even need to provide that transportation. If there's a demand for it, it will be met. Uber is an example. You assume that things don't happen without the state, and that's naive. [quote]Government was almost nonexistent then rose theough the crimes and inhumane treatment of citizens under the new industrialized era where no laws exsisted to protect the workers and businesses perversed those under it.[/quote] Workers have historically been able to protect themselves. Look at OSHA. It's a federal regulatory agency designed to protect workers. The rate of workplace accidents had been steadily decreasing, and OSHA had no effect. Unions are a powerful force, and they're a large part of a free market economy. [quote]You imply the seeking of more power in governement as something inherently corrupt.[/quote] No. I recognize that the state is 1) operated through violence, 2) operated through the confiscation of my wealth, and 3) dismally inefficient, because it isn't beholden to market forces. [quote]Atleast if its corrupt i have a vote and can do something about it.[/quote] Corruption doesn't account for 20 trillion dollars in debt, nor does it account for a half trillion dollar deficit.
