Why Government Spending Does Nothing for Jobs

[bripat9643]

Read it and weep, liberal turds.

The authors of a June 2013 IMF working paper, “Does Public-Sector Employment Fully Crowd Out Private-Sector Employment?,” answer in the affirmative. After examining data from both developing and advanced economies, Alberto Behar and Junghwan Mok find that a public-sector job comes at the expense of a private-sector job. In other words, paying someone to dig holes and fill them up doesn’t reduce unemployment.

Today’s proponents of increased government spending aren’t necessarily arguing for hiring more government workers, whose ranks have been diminished over the last four years. They do want the federal government to provide some extra oomph to an economy that is barely eking out 2 percent growth four years after the recession ended.

Another dose of stimulus is both unnecessary and counterproductive in the medium and long term. There seems to be widespread agreement -- among academics and economists at the IMF, European Central Bank, World Bank and Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, if not among the policy setters themselves -- that government spending has a sizeable negative impact on growth.​

Why Government Spending Does Nothing for Jobs - Bloomberg

 

[ScienceRocks]

Really?

How about infrastructure like paving our roads and building bridges??? This certainly makes a lot of jobs.

 

[candycorn]

Would be shocking to those employed by the government that it doesn't provide jobs.

The only thing black rule in Africa is demonstrated is that blacks aren't fit to rule. Apparently savagery is genetic.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I like the mixed economic concept that seems to work very well.

 

[auditor0007]

Really?

How about infrastructure like paving our roads and building bridges??? This certainly makes a lot of jobs.

And the jobs aren't government jobs, they're private sector jobs funded by taxes. That money works its way through the economy many times over. The argument that government spending is counter productive lacks any vision whatsoever. Now, just hiring people to government jobs to push papers around is another story. That is basically pointless and doesn't lead to any economic growth.

 

[Lakhota]

It appears to me that the author of the OP, Caroline Baum, is a dumbass.

 

[Rozman]

We are closing in on $17 trillion in debt.
So we should print more money and borrow more money
so we can spend more money.....

Hmmmmmm...

 

[Old Rocks]

We are still using many of the facilities created by the men and women that worked for the WPA and CCC's 80 years ago. That was a good investment then, in those circumstances.

And, as Mathew pointed out, the 'government' jobs created by investing in infrastructure are actually private industry jobs. The government just provide money and gaurentees that those that work on those jobs will get a decent wage. Of course, to a Randian ass, a decent wage is an anthema.

When Eisenhower created the Interstate Highway System, he created a huge number of jobs. And those highways created much of the wealth in this nation. We have failed to maintain that system, just as we have failed to maintain our electric grid. And we have failed to maintain wages for our working men and women. All of this is now showing as we are in two digits down the scale when it comes to oppertunity for the average American.

 

[Old Rocks]

We are closing in on $17 trillion in debt.
So we should print more money and borrow more money
so we can spend more money.....

Hmmmmmm...

Oh yeah, just let the GOP spend more on a couple of more useless wars, and create another attempt at the Second Great Republican Depression.

Spending on infrastructure is investment. The same as spending on education.

 

[Rozman]

We do a fine job spending on education....
And the kids that do graduate some can barely read or
do complex math.

 

[zeke]

Read it and weep, liberal turds.

The authors of a June 2013 IMF working paper, “Does Public-Sector Employment Fully Crowd Out Private-Sector Employment?,” answer in the affirmative. After examining data from both developing and advanced economies, Alberto Behar and Junghwan Mok find that a public-sector job comes at the expense of a private-sector job. In other words, paying someone to dig holes and fill them up doesn’t reduce unemployment.

Today’s proponents of increased government spending aren’t necessarily arguing for hiring more government workers, whose ranks have been diminished over the last four years. They do want the federal government to provide some extra oomph to an economy that is barely eking out 2 percent growth four years after the recession ended.

Another dose of stimulus is both unnecessary and counterproductive in the medium and long term. There seems to be widespread agreement -- among academics and economists at the IMF, European Central Bank, World Bank and Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, if not among the policy setters themselves -- that government spending has a sizeable negative impact on growth.​

Why Government Spending Does Nothing for Jobs - Bloomberg

YOU, of all people are relying on authors from the hated International Monetary Fund. The same fund that is helping bring about the new world order.

To fuking funny. LMAO.

 

[Old Rocks]

We do a fine job spending on education....
And the kids that do graduate some can barely read or
do complex math.

Well, I would have to assume that you are speaking from personal experiance. Now, as I have taken 22 credits is such sissy courses as chemistry and calculus while working full time, I think maybe I have a bit more insight than you on that subject.

There will always be those who make no attempt to take advantage of the educational system. However, in the classrooms I attended, there were many young people, 16 to 22, that were quite capable. And had attended public schools.

 

[NYcarbineer]

We do a fine job spending on education....
And the kids that do graduate some can barely read or
do complex math.

Well, we could end public education altogether and let the private for-profit sector handle it.

Then it would end up like college; your kids would graduate from high school with fifty thousand or so in high school student loans,

and looking for someone to loan them the money to go to college.

 

[candycorn]

We do a fine job spending on education....
And the kids that do graduate some can barely read or
do complex math.

Well, we could end public education altogether and let the private for-profit sector handle it.

Then it would end up like college; your kids would graduate from high school with fifty thousand or so in high school student loans,

and looking for someone to loan them the money to go to college.

The goal is to have Latourneau (sp?) K-12, DeVry K-12, University of Phoenix K-12... How much you want to bet that tuition is always going to be greater than the voucher you get from the government?

 

[bripat9643]

Would be shocking to those employed by the government that it doesn't provide jobs.

The only thing black rule in Africa is demonstrated is that blacks aren't fit to rule. Apparently savagery is genetic.

They get a paycheck, but they don't produce anything. They are just mouths the taxpayers have to feed.

You obviously didn't even read the article

 

[bripat9643]

I like the mixed economic concept that seems to work very well.

It doesn't work worth a dam. The market portion of it works. The government portion of it is pouring money down the sewer hole.

 

[bripat9643]

Really?

How about infrastructure like paving our roads and building bridges??? This certainly makes a lot of jobs.

And the jobs aren't government jobs, they're private sector jobs funded by taxes. That money works its way through the economy many times over. The argument that government spending is counter productive lacks any vision whatsoever.

That's true. It lacks the hallucinations and delusions that you suffer from. Any dollar government spends is a dollar a taxpayer can no longer spend. All government spending does is take money from one pocket and put it another. The later pocket belongs to someone who isn't producing anything of use to the taxpayers.

Now, just hiring people to government jobs to push papers around is another story. That is basically pointless and doesn't lead to any economic growth.

All government spending is pointless unless its for something the private sector can't produce for itself. The military, the courts, and the police are the only things that qualify.

 

[Redfish]

There is a difference between govt spending on giveaway programs and govt spending on infrastructure and defense. Like it or not, govt spending on infrastructure and defense does create american private sector jobs. welfare, unemployment, etc do not create jobs, they create dependency.

The real problem is not what the govt spends on, its that it spends more than it has every year. Deficit spending by government will destroy this economy.

I think you guys are arguing about the wrong things.

 

[bripat9643]

It appears to me that the author of the OP, Caroline Baum, is a dumbass.

How ironic coming from the forum dumbass.

 

[daveman]

Really?

How about infrastructure like paving our roads and building bridges??? This certainly makes a lot of jobs.

Until the project's over.