Why do americans hate government spending?

[Dovahkiin]

We don't hate government spending we hate government overspending which leads to among other things 19 trillion dollars of debt.

19 trillion in net financial assets? Needs to be more!

wow

shockingly stewpud

How much do you pay the person that reminds you to chew your food?

Notice how you don't have an argument. Why don't you kindly explain to me what the national debt actually is.

Debt, money owned, a bill that ever increases and is never paid b/c if people like you actually had to pay for what you want you'd understand economics and stop being a socialist.


but seriously, how much does that person get paid?

That isn't an explanation. You simply gave me the definition of debt.

 

[Dovahkiin]

Why would anyone love government spending is a better question?

Helps the private sector acquire net financial assets, reduce the reliance on bank credit, increases aggregate demand.

Those are all illusory benefits. And you think they compensate for a great big gaping hole in my wallet?

I favor lower taxes. When the economy is experiencing depressed demand, the government needs to spend to help the private sector deleverage/have more dollars to spend.

And I suppose you also believe that tax rate reductions remove dollars from the economy.....

Taxation destroys dollars.

 

[Dovahkiin]

I seriously want to understand this. Any ideas?

Nobody "hates" spending, that's like saying we hate government.

We just don't like the irresponsible manner in which either are carried out. Saying we hate government or hate spending is the liberal narrative that basically says it's all or nothing. If you're not all in on everything at any level, then you hate everything at any level.

It isn't the most intelligent response.

We just don't like the irresponsible manner in which either are carried out.

Explain what's irresponsible. The only real issue is we're not spending enough.

You really need to have it explained to you why government spending is irresponsible? Just consider Social Security, the world's largest Ponzi scheme.

You don't know what a ponzi scheme is.

 

[Dovahkiin]

I seriously want to understand this. Any ideas?

Because it is stolen money spent by a mob.

I am sure you can tell why according to MMT theory the government is god though...

Because your economic understanding in its vastness can be summed up with:
-

You're an idiot.

Because it is stolen money spent by a mob.

The government is the currency issuer here. Banks also create money, loans create deposits, but this comes with a matching liability within the private sector.

I am sure you can tell why according to MMT theory the government is god though...

Capitalism cannot exist without a government.

Because your economic understanding in its vastness can be summed up with:

 

[Dovahkiin]

I seriously want to understand this. Any ideas?

Nobody "hates" spending, that's like saying we hate government.

We just don't like the irresponsible manner in which either are carried out. Saying we hate government or hate spending is the liberal narrative that basically says it's all or nothing. If you're not all in on everything at any level, then you hate everything at any level.

It isn't the most intelligent response.

We just don't like the irresponsible manner in which either are carried out.

Explain what's irresponsible. The only real issue is we're not spending enough.

You really need to have it explained to you why government spending is irresponsible? Just consider Social Security, the world's largest Ponzi scheme.

Just as an aside, I'm pretty sure that Dovahkiin knows far more about economics than most posters on this forum (myself included). You aren't going to get away with throwaway statements like "the world's largest Ponzi scheme" unless you actually discuss the specific details about the issues you have with things and why.

No, he understands precisely zero about economics. Parroting one (very stupid) theory is not economic understanding. It's worse than knowing nothing.

Of course, we know the only reason he does this is that he is a hard core leftists and wants something to justify his crazy views with.

Government spending is NEGATIVELY associated with growth, there are dozens of studies that prove this... Taking people's earnings and paying people not to work, does not actually work.

No, he understands precisely zero about economics.

No.

Parroting one (very stupid) theory is not economic understanding.

I have yet to find any actual arguments against reality.

Government spending is NEGATIVELY associated with growth

High government debt/deficits follow slow growth.

Taking people's earnings and paying people not to work, does not actually work.

You don't understand what a budget deficit is.

 

[Dovahkiin]

I seriously want to understand this. Any ideas?

You don't understand anything about how or why government spends money. Much of it is waste, fraud, abuse of power by deal making, spending against people's interests, funding social wet dreams over infrastructure, military and police (which are the primary reasons government exists) and on and on.

It's a bizarre question, how can one live long enough to learn how to type on a computer, register on a forum and ask a question so out of touch with reality?

I understand why a government spends money. For the public purpose. Ok.. all government spending ends up as income for someone in the private/foreign sector, even if it's considered "wasteful." Assume the government deficit spends 1 billion on building a test site in the middle of the desert. Some would call this wasteful. Ok, so people are employed to build this and paid the dollars, and the businesses that provide the real resources are also paid dollars, which they use to pay their employees. This all boosts demand. Now, should this happen? No, of course not, but in an economy with depressed demand, plenty of real resources, and unemployed people, what's the real harm? And the "wasteful spending" is only a small amount of overall government spending.

Wasteful spending is a huge part of government spending and no, it doesn't all benefit the private sector.

When there's plenty of real resources, and when businesses are just waiting for people to start producing sales, what is the harm?

The harm is that resources are being consumed by useless parasites instead of being put to a productive use.

Elaborate on this nonsense.

 

[Dovahkiin]

Everyone loves gov spending ..... On the things they like !

You could not be any more incorrect. In my view government should perform essential services only. Do exactly what the Constitution permits it to do. And not one thing more..
The following depts should not exist.
Dept of Education( public) ....This is a state and for that matter, a local issue. The federal government in its fervor to exert control at the local level, developed a means to do so by offering money in lieu of having a say in local school districts.
Dept of Housing and Urban Development. Another method by which the federal government has ingratiated itself into local and state matters. Eliminate it.
Dept of Commerce. There are other federal depts ( FAA, FHWA, ICC) that enforce federal interstate commerce laws and regulations. The Dept of Commerce is redundant. Eliminate it.
Dept of the Treasury. Not needed. The federal reserve is the US Central bank.....
Dept of Homeland Security.....Why?.......The depts that existed under this umbrella of bureaucracy existed BEFORE DHS was formed. This is another redundant bureaucracy...Shut it down..BTW, there is a very loud and intense movement to kick out those arrogant do nothing uneducated shit heads that screen airline passengers. A month does not go by where the federal government does not easily sneak past these people all kinds of illegal stuff. through airport security.
Nearly HALF of all federal employees are paid by some kind of bureaucracy whose job it is to find things on which to spend money.

Dept of Education( public) ....This is a state and for that matter, a local issue. The federal government in its fervor to exert control at the local level, developed a means to do so by offering money in lieu of having a say in local school districts.

I would agree if the government provided adequate funding to all states.

Dept of Housing and Urban Development. Another method by which the federal government has ingratiated itself into local and state matters. Eliminate it.

Horrible idea.

Dept of Commerce. There are other federal depts ( FAA, FHWA, ICC) that enforce federal interstate commerce laws and regulations. The Dept of Commerce is redundant. Eliminate it.

Sure.

Dept of the Treasury. Not needed. The federal reserve is the US Central bank.....

Insanity.

ept of Homeland Security.....Why?.......The depts that existed under this umbrella of bureaucracy existed BEFORE DHS was formed. This is another redundant bureaucracy...Shut it down..BTW, there is a very loud and intense movement to kick out those arrogant do nothing uneducated shit heads that screen airline passengers. A month does not go by where the federal government does not easily sneak past these people all kinds of illegal stuff. through airport security.

No. What happens to the people employed?

 

[Dovahkiin]

I seriously want to understand this. Any ideas?

Nobody "hates" spending, that's like saying we hate government.

We just don't like the irresponsible manner in which either are carried out. Saying we hate government or hate spending is the liberal narrative that basically says it's all or nothing. If you're not all in on everything at any level, then you hate everything at any level.

It isn't the most intelligent response.

We just don't like the irresponsible manner in which either are carried out.

Explain what's irresponsible. The only real issue is we're not spending enough.

You really need to have it explained to you why government spending is irresponsible? Just consider Social Security, the world's largest Ponzi scheme.

Just as an aside, I'm pretty sure that Dovahkiin knows far more about economics than most posters on this forum (myself included). You aren't going to get away with throwaway statements like "the world's largest Ponzi scheme" unless you actually discuss the specific details about the issues you have with things and why.

I have discussed the SS Ponzie scheme ad nauseum. Anyone who claims it isn't a Ponzi scheme is an economic ignoramus.

So why don't you elaborate. Are you mad that SS doesn't actually have a trust fund with dollars in a vault?

 

[Dovahkiin]

Explain what's irresponsible. The only real issue is we're not spending enough.

If you have to ask, you'll never know.

This is the stupid shit I get tired of. You don't even know why you believe it's "irresponsible."

Sure I do.... but if you think we're not spending enough, you'll never get it. Why should I, or anyone for that matter, waste our time? You think we got to $20,000,000,000,000 in debt and $120,000,000,000,000 in unfunded liabilities by under-spending?

You're either being silly or are really not that bright. That's like having $20,000 in credit card debt and saying "i just haven't borrowed enough".

Imagine having a printing press in your basement and debt denominated in what comes off that press.

That's exactly why we don't want government doing the same thing.

Do you understand money creation?

 

[Dovahkiin]

I seriously want to understand this. Any ideas?

Americans don't hate all government spending, we hate wasteful government spending.

It's all wasteful

In a world without a government spending, we'd all have to rely on bank loans. Good luck with that.

 

[Dovahkiin]

If you have to ask, you'll never know.

This is the stupid shit I get tired of. You don't even know why you believe it's "irresponsible."

Sure I do.... but if you think we're not spending enough, you'll never get it. Why should I, or anyone for that matter, waste our time? You think we got to $20,000,000,000,000 in debt and $120,000,000,000,000 in unfunded liabilities by under-spending?

You're either being silly or are really not that bright. That's like having $20,000 in credit card debt and saying "i just haven't borrowed enough".

Imagine having a printing press in your basement and debt denominated in what comes off that press.

That's exactly why we don't want government doing the same thing.

Just imagine the possibilities:

So you give me zimbabwe, a country that destroyed its producers. Nice job there buddy..

 

[Dovahkiin]

Because there are quite a few out there who never question where the money goes...
Because there are many who feel we don't spend enough.....
Because many feel that the money the people earn belongs to the government first
and are angry that we are allowed to keep some of it....

Because the Libs want to solve every fucking problem
this country faces by throwing more money at it....

Because many feel that the money the people earn belongs to the government first

Where did the dollars come from in the first place?

They were EARNED..Please don't come back with "but for the existence of government, no one would be able to earn a dime"...That is utter horseshit.
Your parroting Obama's infamous "you didn't build that" fuck turd spew is insulting.

Go further then that.

 

[Dovahkiin]

Nobody "hates" spending, that's like saying we hate government.

We just don't like the irresponsible manner in which either are carried out. Saying we hate government or hate spending is the liberal narrative that basically says it's all or nothing. If you're not all in on everything at any level, then you hate everything at any level.

It isn't the most intelligent response.

We just don't like the irresponsible manner in which either are carried out.

Explain what's irresponsible. The only real issue is we're not spending enough.

You really need to have it explained to you why government spending is irresponsible? Just consider Social Security, the world's largest Ponzi scheme.

Just as an aside, I'm pretty sure that Dovahkiin knows far more about economics than most posters on this forum (myself included). You aren't going to get away with throwaway statements like "the world's largest Ponzi scheme" unless you actually discuss the specific details about the issues you have with things and why.

No, he understands precisely zero about economics. Parroting one (very stupid) theory is not economic understanding. It's worse than knowing nothing.

Of course, we know the only reason he does this is that he is a hard core leftists and wants something to justify his crazy views with.

Government spending is NEGATIVELY associated with growth, there are dozens of studies that prove this... Taking people's earnings and paying people not to work, does not actually work.

Can you link me to these studies you refer to? From everything I've heard and seen it tends to be a nuanced subject (unless you are talking about extremes like communism or something).

On Dovahkiin, maybe...maybe not. I actually suspect he's probably college-age and trying to discuss topics he is learning about on this forum. With that said, I have nothing other than a basic understanding of economics so even if you parrot some theory that goes beyond the basics...it means you at least know more than me about that theory and, most likely, know more than me in general about economics which isn't something I tend to study a lot in my off time.

Can you link me to these studies you refer to? From everything I've heard and seen it tends to be a nuanced subject (unless you are talking about extremes like communism or something).

High deficits/debt follow slow growth.

 

[Dovahkiin]

I favor lower taxes. When the economy is experiencing depressed demand, the government needs to spend to help the private sector deleverage/have more dollars to spend.

Funniest thing I read all day!!

Were you in a coma next to Rip Van Winkle this past decade? Japan, China the EU and the USA ran up $4 in debt for every dollar in GDP. It was the biggest spending orgy in history.

How much of that spending ended up in the hands of americans?

Wait. You were asking without knowing the answer? Are you Paul Krugman?

The GDP in 09 was about $14T and today you let's call it $18T, thats a $4T increase.

We added $9T in US debt PLUS the Fed added $4T to there balance sheet so we took out 13T in debt to fund 4T in GDP.

Is that your version of a good deal

Yes. The debt is no real burden.

THE HELL IT ISN'T........Now you're just making up stupid shit.
20 years ago I bet you were crowing about the alleged Clinton budget surplus.....Then 10 years ago , you were whining about the Bush deficit of a whopping $400 billion. Now that one of your own has crushed us with $20 Trillion in debt, suddenly debt is a good thing. In fact you say "spend more"....You could be any more full of shit.

20 years ago I bet you were crowing about the alleged Clinton budget surplus.....

The clinton surplus was a drain on the private sector, further accelerating the increase in household debt.

Then 10 years ago , you were whining about the Bush deficit of a whopping $400 billion.

Bush helped keep us afloat.

Now that one of your own has crushed us with $20 Trillion in debt, suddenly debt is a good thing.

Without the national debt, we'd have no dollars.

 

[Dovahkiin]

Some do, most don't. The problem is the retards think government should be a business instead of a service.

the problem is that some think the government is there to supply you with all your needs.
Spending for those things that the government is supposed to spend on is one thing. but taking money from one persons pocket and putting into another is a completely different thing.
So yes, people do not like to hear about new government social programs that are designed for no other purpose than a redistribution of wealth.

To take this one step further....The ONLY reason government increases entitlements is to build a voting base for those who do the providing of said entitlements.

Or to help the poor.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I seriously want to understand this. Any ideas?

It's not spending that we have issue with, it's the debt.

we have over $19 Trillion in debt. That devalues the dollar and makes it harder for people to advance themselves.

add in who we borrow from and we can't really push certain countries to stop being bad actors.

and a lot of the spending is just bribes for votes or complete waste.

Devalues the dollar?
DollarIndexSpot Exchange rate

That in no way counters what I said.

American Dollar, Dollar Collapse, Dollar Devaluation- Education

The U.S. started to gradually move away from the Gold Standard with the adoption of the Bretton Woods system after World War II. With Bretton Woods, the world’s currencies were pegged to the dollar, which in turn was pegged to Gold at a rate of $35 per ounce. This was done to provide confidence to the world that the dollar was secure. Countries were required to maintain exchange rates within plus or minus 1% of parity with Gold by buying or selling currency in foreign exchange markets. Thus began the long, strange trip that has seen the U.S. Dollar become the most sought after currency among businessman and commoners alike.


When compared to hard money backed by gold or silver, this debt-based approach has the advantage of making the currency elastic, giving the government a means of expanding or contracting the money supply in response to changing economic conditions. The disadvantage of this approach is inflation. The money supply must be continually expanded in order to finance interest payments on the debt by which it is issued. This devalues the currency, causing inflation.

American Dollar, Dollar Collapse, Dollar Devaluation- Education

Stop.

The U.S. started to gradually move away from the Gold Standard with the adoption of the Bretton Woods system after World War II.

Greatest thing we'd ever done.

With Bretton Woods, the world’s currencies were pegged to the dollar, which in turn was pegged to Gold at a rate of $35 per ounce.

Yeah, and it failed.

This was done to provide confidence to the world that the dollar was secure.

The dollar is secure. Do you understand the dollar index?

The money supply must be continually expanded in order to finance interest payments on the debt by which it is issued. This devalues the currency, causing inflation.

Measure inflation by how many hours someone has to work to purchase goods. Compared to the 1930's, workers now have phones, plenty of food, xbox's... working around 40 hours a week. (Usually.)

how does government spending lead to the xbox.

I would love to hear you connect something like that.

 

[bripat9643]

Maybe the OP can explain how spending almost 800K thousand dollars to see if we can train a lion to run on a treadmill is good for the people.
When he cant find a rational answer, that will be the answer to the OP question.

800 thousand dollars went to individuals in the private sector who in turn used the dollars. There are few examples of this type of waste in relation to all spending though.

800K dollars was taken from people in the private sector who were unable to use if for their own more productive uses. The net result is negative to the economy.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Dova is just a troll.

it's not possible to be this dumb

 

[westwall]

I seriously want to understand this. Any ideas?

My main issue is it is incredibly wasteful. The money gets hijacked by special interests and is diverted away from the projects where it is needed and funneled into the pockets of the friends and supporters of the politician promoting it. So basically graft and corruption are the main problems with it.

Only a portion of government spending is wasteful. Even that wasteful spending is useful.

Wrong on both counts.

 

[bripat9643]

I seriously want to understand this. Any ideas?

My main issue is it is incredibly wasteful. The money gets hijacked by special interests and is diverted away from the projects where it is needed and funneled into the pockets of the friends and supporters of the politician promoting it. So basically graft and corruption are the main problems with it.

Only a portion of government spending is wasteful. Even that wasteful spending is useful.

It's 98% waste,