GOP Gets Their Wish - Unemployment is Up

[kaz]

The problem with the WTC is to many fucking conservatives think they should have a say. And they caused this crap in the first place.

Have you ever been to NY? This is just tripping.

Ever been? For like 47 years.

Was born here. Spent 3 years in California and Puerto Rico.

Per my last quote, you seriously thought you could make such a ridiculous statement and no one would know how full of shit you are? I love when liberals make arguments that says they are either liars or morons. So which are you?

 

[KissMy]

Either cut government employees pay & benefits or they can all lose their jobs. Take your pick. There will be 100 people standing in line to replace those worthless government employees who want to quit after their pay & benefits are cut.

 

[edthecynic]

Either cut government employees pay & benefits or they can all lose their jobs. Take your pick. There will be 100 people standing in line to replace those worthless government employees who want to quit after their pay & benefits are cut.

That dishonest chart has been debunked ages ago. Most government employees are white collar and most private employees are blue collar. It's no surprise that a UN translator makes more than a ditch digger. When the exact same JOB is compared between the gov and private sectors, the private sector job pays the same or more in most cases.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

This President has destroyed NASA. So expect a lot more Unemployed Americans in the near future. I was just reading how NASA will have to lay off Thousands of employees. And their 9.2% number is bogus. The real Unemployment numbers are much much higher. They'll keep cooking the books but they still wont be able to hide from their awful mess. And they can blame DA BOOOOOSH,PALIN,and BACHMANN all they want. But it's all on them. More & more Americans are seeing this.

 

[mudwhistle]

I see, you just want the government to tax people and waste money.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Your use of the term "creates value" is completely meaningless.

At least I see value in our military.

as a natural monopoly- sure

The military tends to be a natural monopoly and as such is provided by gov't and
given a statutory monopoly.

Nevertheless, it does not mean all services are done efficiently

Remember $55,000 toilet seats?

That's a pretty old example.

How about one that's current.

The government expects contractors to provide full-time employment, health care, and several other requirements mandated by Congress in order to bid for contracts. Automatically this raises the costs of the contract. Now the Dems want another requirement. They want the bidding company to meet ecological requirements. They must meet some crazy standard, or Green-job standard, boosting the costs even more.

Who gives a damn that the job was even completed in a satisfactory manner. The contract calls for the equipment or building to be constructed or installed. It doesn't specifically call for it to actually work in a specific matter or even work at all. It just says that it must be done and what must be done. Construction only requires a one year warranty so usually by the time flaws or manufacturers defects are discovered in the work the warranty has already expired.

This is an example of current governmental waste.

Another example is when a building that should have been torn down is remodeled and shortly after the remodeling is complete the building is torn down and a new building put in it's place. The new building has inherent flaws that become serious maintenance problems in the future. HVAC systems are installed that cannot keep up with the heat load of the building or produces mold and mildew because of design flaws. The money is already gone by the time this is discovered. I see this happening on military installations all of the time. This all falls under the Defense Department. This is a lot of the waste you see in defense.

 

[kaz]

I see, you just want the government to tax people and waste money.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Your use of the term "creates value" is completely meaningless.

At least I see value in our military.

I'm surprised that someone who so deeply understands GDP they can endlessly post a formula whiffed on this one. The discussion was on economic value. The military is for protection. It's like homeowners insurance, it doesn't make you money, but it protects what you have.

 

[kaz]

Either cut government employees pay & benefits or they can all lose their jobs. Take your pick. There will be 100 people standing in line to replace those worthless government employees who want to quit after their pay & benefits are cut.

That dishonest chart has been debunked ages ago. Most government employees are white collar and most private employees are blue collar. It's no surprise that a UN translator makes more than a ditch digger. When the exact same JOB is compared between the gov and private sectors, the private sector job pays the same or more in most cases.

I'm curious. Every post I ever read from you is defending government. In what way are you a "cynic," Ed? Is your name even Ed?

 

[kaz]

This President has destroyed NASA. So expect a lot more Unemployed Americans in the near future. I was just reading how NASA will have to lay off Thousands of employees. And their 9.2% number is bogus. The real Unemployment numbers are much much higher. They'll keep cooking the books but they still wont be able to hide from their awful mess. And they can blame DA BOOOOOSH,PALIN,and BACHMANN all they want. But it's all on them. More & more Americans are seeing this.

Stopping taking that money from taxpayers is going to create unemployment? That makes no sense

 

[edthecynic]

I see, you just want the government to tax people and waste money.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Your use of the term "creates value" is completely meaningless.

At least I see value in our military.

I'm surprised that someone who so deeply understands GDP they can endlessly post a formula whiffed on this one. The discussion was on economic value. The military is for protection. It's like homeowners insurance, it doesn't make you money, but it protects what you have.

The military protects this great country, whose government in turn protects the right to private ownership, which is valuable beyond calculation.

 

[edthecynic]

I see, you just want the government to tax people and waste money.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Your use of the term "creates value" is completely meaningless.

At least I see value in our military.

I'm surprised that someone who so deeply understands GDP they can endlessly post a formula whiffed on this one. The discussion was on economic value. The military is for protection. It's like homeowners insurance, it doesn't make you money, but it protects what you have.

I simply debunk the lies. Can I help it if CON$ habitually lie about the government? When CON$ choose to lie about something else I debunk that too!

 

[cloudy]

At least I see value in our military.

as a natural monopoly- sure

The military tends to be a natural monopoly and as such is provided by gov't and
given a statutory monopoly.

Nevertheless, it does not mean all services are done efficiently

Remember $55,000 toilet seats?

That's a pretty old example.

How about one that's current.

The government expects contractors to provide full-time employment, health care, and several other requirements mandated by Congress in order to bid for contracts. Automatically this raises the costs of the contract. Now the Dems want another requirement. They want the bidding company to meet ecological requirements. They must meet some crazy standard, or Green-job standard, boosting the costs even more.

Who gives a damn that the job was even completed in a satisfactory manner. The contract calls for the equipment or building to be constructed or installed. It doesn't specifically call for it to actually work in a specific matter or even work at all. It just says that it must be done and what must be done. Construction only requires a one year warranty so usually by the time flaws or manufacturers defects are discovered in the work the warranty has already expired.

This is an example of current governmental waste.

Another example is when a building that should have been torn down is remodeled and shortly after the remodeling is complete the building is torn down and a new building put in it's place. The new building has inherent flaws that become serious maintenance problems in the future. HVAC systems are installed that cannot keep up with the heat load of the building or produces mold and mildew because of design flaws. The money is already gone by the time this is discovered. I see this happening on military installations all of the time. This all falls under the Defense Department. This is a lot of the waste you see in defense.

Being green is cost effective, it's conservatism at it's best.
Just because people like it 65 degrees inside on a 95 degree day outside is a flaw? Ventilation is the key to any new construction, contractors on the job you've described did not do things properly, and maybe the building engineer is at fault too.
They'd better get accustomed to 80 or 85 degrees indoors. Some people are spoiled.
Government waste are companies such as Halliburton and Blackwater, with special interests and lobbyists running Washington.
There ought to be a order that lobbyists are not allowed in DC period, and that phone calls from them to lawmakers are spied upon and cut off when they begin doing their backdoor deals.

 

[cloudy]

Either cut government employees pay & benefits or they can all lose their jobs. Take your pick. There will be 100 people standing in line to replace those worthless government employees who want to quit after their pay & benefits are cut.

That dishonest chart has been debunked ages ago. Most government employees are white collar and most private employees are blue collar. It's no surprise that a UN translator makes more than a ditch digger. When the exact same JOB is compared between the gov and private sectors, the private sector job pays the same or more in most cases.

I'm curious. Every post I ever read from you is defending government. In what way are you a "cynic," Ed? Is your name even Ed?

Who cares, my name isn't really cloudy, it's a nick.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There ought to be a order that lobbyists are not allowed in DC period, and that phone calls from them to lawmakers are spied upon and cut off when they begin doing their backdoor deals.

And there’s good reason why there’s not:

Amendment 1 – US Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

[DontBeStupid]

I see, you just want the government to tax people and waste money.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Your use of the term "creates value" is completely meaningless.

At least I see value in our military.

I'm surprised that someone who so deeply understands GDP they can endlessly post a formula whiffed on this one. The discussion was on economic value. The military is for protection. It's like homeowners insurance, it doesn't make you money, but it protects what you have.

If the discussion was on economic value, then Boedicca should have stated that when I gave her ample opportunity to define "net value" (her term). It doesn't change my point though which is that the government can, and does, provide value to the country and to its citizens. To claim otherwise is just wrong.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Remember $55,000 toilet seats?

I love this example. I love that it only looks at one side of the equation. Is a $55,000 toilet seat an inefficient use of tax payer money? On the surface, sure. But you'd be ignoring the fact that some toilet seat company just had their best year on record.

 

[kaz]

At least I see value in our military.

I'm surprised that someone who so deeply understands GDP they can endlessly post a formula whiffed on this one. The discussion was on economic value. The military is for protection. It's like homeowners insurance, it doesn't make you money, but it protects what you have.

I simply debunk the lies. Can I help it if CON$ habitually lie about the government? When CON$ choose to lie about something else I debunk that too!

Fair enough. And the laugh is on me. I thought I was mocking you when I told you most people think cynic is someone who questions authority, not someone who questions those who question authority. But that is actually what you mean. My bad.

 

[kaz]

At least I see value in our military.

I'm surprised that someone who so deeply understands GDP they can endlessly post a formula whiffed on this one. The discussion was on economic value. The military is for protection. It's like homeowners insurance, it doesn't make you money, but it protects what you have.

If the discussion was on economic value, then Boedicca should have stated that when I gave her ample opportunity to define "net value" (her term). It doesn't change my point though which is that the government can, and does, provide value to the country and to its citizens. To claim otherwise is just wrong.

OK, so you've so lowered the bar that even government can clear it. Anyone, by definition, but an anarchist would agree with you since even I as a libertarian want some government. I want a military, police, roads, civil and criminal courts, management of natural resources (e.g., land ownership, water).

But since you lowered the bar to that government provides any value and I'm not aware of any actual anarchists on the site, your point is so limited as to have no meaning at all.

 

[boedicca]

At least I see value in our military.

I'm surprised that someone who so deeply understands GDP they can endlessly post a formula whiffed on this one. The discussion was on economic value. The military is for protection. It's like homeowners insurance, it doesn't make you money, but it protects what you have.

If the discussion was on economic value, then Boedicca should have stated that when I gave her ample opportunity to define "net value" (her term). It doesn't change my point though which is that the government can, and does, provide value to the country and to its citizens. To claim otherwise is just wrong.

You said government creates value. The only way to create value is for the output to be worth more than the inputs. You still haven't described how government does that other than to point out the obvious bromide of the military. The military is one of the few constitutionally valid purposes of the federal government, and is a fraction of government spending (and was largely unaffected by The Stimulus Bill).

So, please describe all The Value we got from the massive increase in federal spending since the Dems took over Congress in 2006?

 

[mudwhistle]

as a natural monopoly- sure

The military tends to be a natural monopoly and as such is provided by gov't and
given a statutory monopoly.

Nevertheless, it does not mean all services are done efficiently

Remember $55,000 toilet seats?

That's a pretty old example.

How about one that's current.

The government expects contractors to provide full-time employment, health care, and several other requirements mandated by Congress in order to bid for contracts. Automatically this raises the costs of the contract. Now the Dems want another requirement. They want the bidding company to meet ecological requirements. They must meet some crazy standard, or Green-job standard, boosting the costs even more.

Who gives a damn that the job was even completed in a satisfactory manner. The contract calls for the equipment or building to be constructed or installed. It doesn't specifically call for it to actually work in a specific matter or even work at all. It just says that it must be done and what must be done. Construction only requires a one year warranty so usually by the time flaws or manufacturers defects are discovered in the work the warranty has already expired.

This is an example of current governmental waste.

Another example is when a building that should have been torn down is remodeled and shortly after the remodeling is complete the building is torn down and a new building put in it's place. The new building has inherent flaws that become serious maintenance problems in the future. HVAC systems are installed that cannot keep up with the heat load of the building or produces mold and mildew because of design flaws. The money is already gone by the time this is discovered. I see this happening on military installations all of the time. This all falls under the Defense Department. This is a lot of the waste you see in defense.

Being green is cost effective, it's conservatism at it's best.
Just because people like it 65 degrees inside on a 95 degree day outside is a flaw? Ventilation is the key to any new construction, contractors on the job you've described did not do things properly, and maybe the building engineer is at fault too.
They'd better get accustomed to 80 or 85 degrees indoors. Some people are spoiled.
Government waste are companies such as Halliburton and Blackwater, with special interests and lobbyists running Washington.
There ought to be a order that lobbyists are not allowed in DC period, and that phone calls from them to lawmakers are spied upon and cut off when they begin doing their backdoor deals.

85 degrees indoors is not healthy. Too much humidity and too much heat. Carbon Dioxide levels also need to be address. And 65 degrees is bordering on refrigeration, not air-conditioning. 70-72 degrees is optimum.

I didn't even mention lobbyists. They have very little to do with smaller construction projects on military posts.

The biggest problem is the engineer. He's the one that's supposed to plan the project, assure it's approval, and check up on the work in progress. Most of the time they wash their hands of it once the paperwork is all approved. Quality control is not even considered.

 

[DontBeStupid]

I'm surprised that someone who so deeply understands GDP they can endlessly post a formula whiffed on this one. The discussion was on economic value. The military is for protection. It's like homeowners insurance, it doesn't make you money, but it protects what you have.

If the discussion was on economic value, then Boedicca should have stated that when I gave her ample opportunity to define "net value" (her term). It doesn't change my point though which is that the government can, and does, provide value to the country and to its citizens. To claim otherwise is just wrong.

You said government creates value. The only way to create value is for the output to be worth more than the inputs. You still haven't described how government does that other than to point out the obvious bromide of the military. The military is one of the few constitutionally valid purposes of the federal government, and is a fraction of government spending (and was largely unaffected by The Stimulus Bill).

So, please describe all The Value we got from the massive increase in federal spending since the Dems took over Congress in 2006?

I will never be able to show it to you because you don't think of "value" the same way I do. You are thinking of it purely from a money stand point but then you completely drop that when it comes to areas of Government you like. There can be now way for me to prove something to you if your own definition changes. I can prove A and you'll simply change your definition of A. It's pointless.

The rest of us here know that a Government is not inherently evil. Even the Founding Fathers knew that. A Government can benefit an economy greatly, even if you disagree.