Jobs vs. Work

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Don't corporations create work? Why are those jobs and not work? Dixie. WHy do you make silly semantic arguments?

No, corporations create JOBS! That is the purpose of this thread, to educate pinheads in the difference. When the government legislates X number of dollars to be spent on building a bridge, it provides WORK for some people, but the WORK is not a JOB, it is temporary WORK, and it is being paid for by your tax dollars. When a corporation creates JOBS, it is done as part of growth and expansion in the business, which will yield the profits to support the JOB long term, and will also contribute positively to the tax revenues. Can you discern the difference between the two? In one instance, WORK is funded and supported by tax dollars, and is not permanent, nor does it stimulate the economy or come as the result of growth and prosperity. In the other instance, JOBS are the result of growth and prosperity, and do stimulate the economy, while increasing the tax base.

 

[Topspin]

Alabama should get their degree back you MORON.
THERE WORK IS NOT A JOB,
When your such an inbred redneck that you parrott Rush a high school grad as your main point of economics you are in trouble.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Alabama should get their degree back you MORON.
THERE WORK IS NOT A JOB,
When your such an inbred redneck that you parrott Rush a high school grad as your main point of economics you are in trouble.

LMAO... Yeah, that's right pinhead, go straight to the bottom of the barrel for some insults and trash talk to hurl at me, since you are wholly incapable of debating the topic.

Oh, by the way... "THERE WORK IS NOT A JOB" is incorrect sentence form, and "parrott" is not a word. You should go get some education before you start critiquing others.

 

[Onceler]

Dixie, I'm not going to spend a ton of time on this, because it's a waste, but what you do not get is that everything is interconnected.

Yes, the jobs for infrastructure will be RELATIVELY temporary, though if the economy picks up & states get back on their feet, those kinds of jobs tend to carry on in other forms. The idea is to just get people who are unemployed working again. Then, a funny thing happens. Those people spend money down at the local diner, taking vacations, buying cars, buying clothes & all sorts of stuff. Their local outlets for these things prosper more, as do their distributors.

Also, actual materials are needed for infrastructure projects, so the distributors & sources for these materials start to prosper more, as well, and they all spend more money at diners, car dealerships, retail outlets, etc., and they also hire new people, who in turn spend money at diners, car dealerships, retail outlets, etc.

Beyond that, some of these projects - like the greening of gov't buildings, which has been such a target of the right - end up saving millions in the long run from new efficiency, giving those states more money for new projects, and helping those states regain financial health.

See that? Everything is very interconnected. It's like a domino effect. It's not just people getting temp jobs for a year, and then being unemployed again, with no effect on the economy.

Get it?

 

[Topspin]

Dixie your ilk is why BAMA is one of the lower educated states.

 

[DamnYankee]

oh really? The blueridge parkway stands as a testament to your inaccuracy.

Yeah, it only took 60 years to build, you idiot.

 

[DamnYankee]

Still, you are comparing apples with tangerines. What happened during WWII has absolutely nothing to do with 2009 America, we're not the same country. My only point is, wartime economic growth is not comparable to government funded socialist policy. But even IF you want to make that comparison, wars are temporary as well, whatever economic stimulation they create, doesn't last. Also, there has never been a time of war in which America ran a budget surplus. In fact, much of our national debt is the result of previous wartime spending.

So now we are creating a war on capitalism.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Dixie, I'm not going to spend a ton of time on this, because it's a waste, but what you do not get is that everything is interconnected.

Yes, the jobs for infrastructure will be RELATIVELY temporary, though if the economy picks up & states get back on their feet, those kinds of jobs tend to carry on in other forms. The idea is to just get people who are unemployed working again. Then, a funny thing happens. Those people spend money down at the local diner, taking vacations, buying cars, buying clothes & all sorts of stuff. Their local outlets for these things prosper more, as do their distributors.

Also, actual materials are needed for infrastructure projects, so the distributors & sources for these materials start to prosper more, as well, and they all spend more money at diners, car dealerships, retail outlets, etc., and they also hire new people, who in turn spend money at diners, car dealerships, retail outlets, etc.

Beyond that, some of these projects - like the greening of gov't buildings, which has been such a target of the right - end up saving millions in the long run from new efficiency, giving those states more money for new projects, and helping those states regain financial health.

See that? Everything is very interconnected. It's like a domino effect. It's not just people getting temp jobs for a year, and then being unemployed again, with no effect on the economy.

Get it?

Nope, I don't get it. Please explain to me how 7% of the workforce (the number currently unemployed) are going to all be hired to build bridges, paid for by the government, and given a pay check by the government, and this is suddenly going to rectify the past year of economic decline? The markets lost about 40% of their value last year, and you think government-funded bridges with government-paid workers are going to bail us out of that?

States are going broke because they suffer from the same pie-in-the-sky liberal mental disorder you do! They think government is the answer to every problem, and if we can just tax people more, and dump more money down a rat hole, it will magically fix everything! Instead of dreaming up ways to spend our money, you should be thinking of ways we can conserve money, cut budgets, and give people back some of their tax dollars, so they can stimulate the economy. Instead of vilifying big business and corporate America, you should be offering them more incentives to make more profits and generate more tax revenues and jobs through growth! But that would be the "capitalist" thing to do, and you are a SOCIALIST!

Your ideas have been tried before! For nearly a century, the former United Soviet Socialist Republic tried the very techniques and approaches you are currently advocating! Their economy FAILED! MISERABLY! It will not work any better here! All you will succeed in doing is, driving us completely into bankruptcy and insolvency, where we will eventually become wards of China! But don't listen to me, I am just a dumb hick from Alabama, right? Just keep on spewing the liberal mantra; "If we could only...." That fucking mindset is the cause of most of our problems! If we could only help the poor... If we could only spend more on teachers... If we could only provide healthcare... If we could only build a few more bridges... If we could only stop global warming... It fucking never ends with you idiots! You've always got the solution and answer, and it's just another trillion tax dollars away, we just need to let you be in charge!

Well, you're in charge! No one can stop your madness now! You'll get your trillion dollar boondoggle, we'll all watch it bomb like everything else you've ever attempted to do, and we'll keep letting you spend the money we don't have until the Chinese take control of the country they eventually own, and put you out of your misery! I guess that's what it's going to take for liberals to wise up!

 

[Bonestorm]

Nope, I don't get it. Please explain to me how 7% of the workforce (the number currently unemployed) are going to all be hired to build bridges, paid for by the government, and given a pay check by the government, and this is suddenly going to rectify the past year of economic decline? The markets lost about 40% of their value last year, and you think government-funded bridges with government-paid workers are going to bail us out of that?

States are going broke because they suffer from the same pie-in-the-sky liberal mental disorder you do! They think government is the answer to every problem, and if we can just tax people more, and dump more money down a rat hole, it will magically fix everything! Instead of dreaming up ways to spend our money, you should be thinking of ways we can conserve money, cut budgets, and give people back some of their tax dollars, so they can stimulate the economy. Instead of vilifying big business and corporate America, you should be offering them more incentives to make more profits and generate more tax revenues and jobs through growth! But that would be the "capitalist" thing to do, and you are a SOCIALIST!

Your ideas have been tried before! For nearly a century, the former United Soviet Socialist Republic tried the very techniques and approaches you are currently advocating! Their economy FAILED! MISERABLY! It will not work any better here! All you will succeed in doing is, driving us completely into bankruptcy and insolvency, where we will eventually become wards of China! But don't listen to me, I am just a dumb hick from Alabama, right? Just keep on spewing the liberal mantra; "If we could only...." That fucking mindset is the cause of most of our problems! If we could only help the poor... If we could only spend more on teachers... If we could only provide healthcare... If we could only build a few more bridges... If we could only stop global warming... It fucking never ends with you idiots! You've always got the solution and answer, and it's just another trillion tax dollars away, we just need to let you be in charge!

Well, you're in charge! No one can stop your madness now! You'll get your trillion dollar boondoggle, we'll all watch it bomb like everything else you've ever attempted to do, and we'll keep letting you spend the money we don't have until the Chinese take control of the country they eventually own, and put you out of your misery! I guess that's what it's going to take for liberals to wise up!

Again, you don't know your ass from your elbow, son. But you are funny as hell.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Again, you don't know your ass from your elbow, son. But you are funny as hell.

I don't know if it makes you feel like a big man to call me "son" but you aren't my father, and I doubt you are old enough to be calling ME "son" ...BOY!

Glad you could join Topspin in the bottom of the insult barrel, that makes at least two of you who are completely over your head in this debate. Any more pinheads want to step up and take a swing at me?

 

[Topspin]

dixie your equivalent to the cable guy,
I bet you look like him too ya inbred redneck

 

[Onceler]

Nope, I don't get it. Please explain to me how 7% of the workforce (the number currently unemployed) are going to all be hired to build bridges, paid for by the government, and given a pay check by the government, and this is suddenly going to rectify the past year of economic decline? The markets lost about 40% of their value last year, and you think government-funded bridges with government-paid workers are going to bail us out of that?

States are going broke because they suffer from the same pie-in-the-sky liberal mental disorder you do! They think government is the answer to every problem, and if we can just tax people more, and dump more money down a rat hole, it will magically fix everything! Instead of dreaming up ways to spend our money, you should be thinking of ways we can conserve money, cut budgets, and give people back some of their tax dollars, so they can stimulate the economy. Instead of vilifying big business and corporate America, you should be offering them more incentives to make more profits and generate more tax revenues and jobs through growth! But that would be the "capitalist" thing to do, and you are a SOCIALIST!

Your ideas have been tried before! For nearly a century, the former United Soviet Socialist Republic tried the very techniques and approaches you are currently advocating! Their economy FAILED! MISERABLY! It will not work any better here! All you will succeed in doing is, driving us completely into bankruptcy and insolvency, where we will eventually become wards of China! But don't listen to me, I am just a dumb hick from Alabama, right? Just keep on spewing the liberal mantra; "If we could only...." That fucking mindset is the cause of most of our problems! If we could only help the poor... If we could only spend more on teachers... If we could only provide healthcare... If we could only build a few more bridges... If we could only stop global warming... It fucking never ends with you idiots! You've always got the solution and answer, and it's just another trillion tax dollars away, we just need to let you be in charge!

Well, you're in charge! No one can stop your madness now! You'll get your trillion dollar boondoggle, we'll all watch it bomb like everything else you've ever attempted to do, and we'll keep letting you spend the money we don't have until the Chinese take control of the country they eventually own, and put you out of your misery! I guess that's what it's going to take for liberals to wise up!

Wow; you actually didn't read a single word I wrote before writing this response.

I knew I was wasting my time.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

The government isn't creating jobs, they are creating work, moron. I am all for government doing something to create jobs, real jobs, which will be around long after the stimulus money runs out. You do that through the private sector and capitalist enterprise, not through government funded socialist mandate. "

You really are a fucking idiot. Answer this dumbass... Do we or do we not need to build our infrastructure? Something that has been neglected for decades. The answer, since I know you will get it wrong, is YES. We are going to spend the money either now or in the future to rebuild bridges, repair roads, build out the power grid to link up alt energy etc.... So take the money and do it now while the job market is loose.

I am not suggesting that these jobs be lifetime jobs. They are designed to provide jobs at a time when the job market is loose. Ideally they will complete these projects as the job market starts to tighten up again in a few years. That way you use the labor while you have access to it and wind it down at a time when other sectors are ramping back up.



"Is this infrastructure rebuild going to be permanent or something? Are we going to be back in a few years for a few more trillion dollars to keep the jobs going? It seems to be your assumption that we can build a few highway bridges, and all our freakin' economic problems are solved! Everybody will forever have a job, and we will live in a world of new bridges and daisies, with money running out our ass! Whereas, if we just gave taxpayers the money, well... they would all blow it on ripple and drugs and be begging on the streets again in a few weeks. You do realize, not everyone is unemployed, right? "

Wow, nice strawman ditzie. Try reading what I have stated rather than going off on another of your moronic rants.



"Well, it comes from budget cuts to funding of things like grants to study the plight of baby seals, the habitat of the wombat, and researching the possibility of extraterrestrial life. I think we have plenty of areas we can cut government spending on enough, to offer some incentives to business to create new jobs. And I HAVE taken economics classes, but it's very obvious you haven't! "

LMAO... no you haven't ditzie... that much is apparent in your complete lack of understanding on the subject. Highlighted by the fact that you think government jobs somehow are socialism.



It depends on why there is deflation. I wouldn't say deflation itself is a bad thing. What may cause deflation, could be bad for the economy, but for the most part... lower prices for the consumer is a good thing. But I have to give you points for having the balls to actually argue a case for inflation! I never thought I would live to see the day pinheads would actually try to convince us that inflation is a good thing, and we should encourage it! Imagine that? All those Carter years of the "Misery Index" were just a figment of our imagination, I guess... huh?

Wrong. Deflation is bad for the economy. If you don't comprehend that then it is yet further proof that you have no clue when it comes to economics. No one said inflation was a good thing ditzie. I in particular said that inflation is preferable to deflation. Which it is. You fucking moron.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Wow; you actually didn't read a single word I wrote before writing this response.

I knew I was wasting my time.

So basically, you can't explain the magic of how 7% of the unemployed are going to save the economy with paychecks from the government? I didn't think you could! Yes, I think you are wasting your time. Maybe you should go find some liberal blog to post Bush jokes on or something?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Wow; you actually didn't read a single word I wrote before writing this response.

I knew I was wasting my time.

apparently we both were.... he continues spouting his idiotic rants rather than actually reading the explanations presented to him. Then he whines about people insulting him at the same time as he runs around chanting his moronic 'u iz a pinhead'

 

[Onceler]

So basically, you can't explain the magic of how 7% of the unemployed are going to save the economy with paychecks from the government? I didn't think you could! Yes, I think you are wasting your time. Maybe you should go find some liberal blog to post Bush jokes on or something?

I don't accept your premise, but I did explain - in detail - the ramifications for the rest of the economy to have 3-4 more million people working, spending money, using materials from distributors, regional & local outlets & producers.

You just didn't read it, or listen. You plugged up your ears & started screaming your usual irrelevant diatribe about the failure of the Soviet Union.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Wrong. Deflation is bad for the economy. If you don't comprehend that then it is yet further proof that you have no clue when it comes to economics. No one said inflation was a good thing ditzie. I in particular said that inflation is preferable to deflation. Which it is. You fucking moron.

Wrong! Deflation is not bad for the economy. You see... you have to prove shit, not just spew shit! You haven't explained why deflation is bad for the economy, and my guess is, you can't. Because "deflation" itself, is not a bad thing for the consumer, in fact, it's a good thing in good economic times! Every consumer I know of wants things cheaper, don't you? I think that is pretty fucking universal isn't it? I've not met any idiots who actually WANT to pay more for stuff... but I don't live in your liberal mecca, maybe there are some where you're from?

Inflation is never preferable, but like I said, it takes some huge kahoneys to make that insane argument! Kudos to you for that! I bet Jimmy Carter wishes you were around back in the 70's!

 

[Bonestorm]

Wrong! Deflation is not bad for the economy. You see... you have to prove shit, not just spew shit! You haven't explained why deflation is bad for the economy, and my guess is, you can't. Because "deflation" itself, is not a bad thing for the consumer, in fact, it's a good thing in good economic times! Every consumer I know of wants things cheaper, don't you? I think that is pretty fucking universal isn't it? I've not met any idiots who actually WANT to pay more for stuff... but I don't live in your liberal mecca, maybe there are some where you're from?

Inflation is never preferable, but like I said, it takes some huge kahoneys to make that insane argument! Kudos to you for that! I bet Jimmy Carter wishes you were around back in the 70's!

Awesome.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I don't accept your premise, but I did explain - in detail - the ramifications for the rest of the economy to have 3-4 more million people working, spending money, using materials from distributors, regional & local outlets & producers.

You just didn't read it, or listen. You plugged up your ears & started screaming your usual irrelevant diatribe about the failure of the Soviet Union.

You have 3-4 million in a workforce of over 100 million, being paid by the government to work, using materials bought by the government to construct things. There will be income taxes and sales taxes paid, as well as corporate taxes, but these will amount to a fraction of the total cost to government. Not only that, but when Acme Materials lands the Big Gubm'nt Contract, their charge for a bag of concrete will triple, and of course, we have to hire a contingent of pinheads to push pencils and crunch numbers and do environmental impact studies on the new bridge... all the dignitaries in charge will have to be provided new cars and trucks to do this "job" and our tax dollars will be completely squandered by "government" officials, overseeing our best interests!

When this trillion dollars runs out, what then? You gonna lay off 3-4 million workers? What about their families? What about their children? We gonna just leave them out in the cold to starve to death? Nawww... You'll be back pulling at our purse strings again in a few years, pleading for another trillion dollars to keep this insane shit going! You HAVE to, there IS no other option!

 

[Onceler]

You have 3-4 million in a workforce of over 100 million, being paid by the government to work, using materials bought by the government to construct things. There will be income taxes and sales taxes paid, as well as corporate taxes, but these will amount to a fraction of the total cost to government. Not only that, but when Acme Materials lands the Big Gubm'nt Contract, their charge for a bag of concrete will triple, and of course, we have to hire a contingent of pinheads to push pencils and crunch numbers and do environmental impact studies on the new bridge... all the dignitaries in charge will have to be provided new cars and trucks to do this "job" and our tax dollars will be completely squandered by "government" officials, overseeing our best interests!

When this trillion dollars runs out, what then? You gonna lay off 3-4 million workers? What about their families? What about their children? We gonna just leave them out in the cold to starve to death? Nawww... You'll be back pulling at our purse strings again in a few years, pleading for another trillion dollars to keep this insane shit going! You HAVE to, there IS no other option!

I explained that to you, as well, but you don't read or listen.

All you have is hyperbole. You have to mischaracterize & exaggerate everything. It's weird.