Government vs. Production

[SideArmed]

....Let's face it, an economy is little more than people passing money around in exchange for goods and services.

Couldn't agree more. Which is why I take exception to being lumped into a category with the likes of all the crooked politicians. Pretty much the same as when LEO's all get a bad rap because of a few spoiled apples.

 

[SideArmed]

A lot of government jobs are over paid because they are government jobs. A temp mail delivery person makes 26.12 an hour...I mean really????? maybe in New York city but in a small town that is ridiculous. It is not that hard to deliver mail.

The postal service is an independent government agency. And has not received tax payer dollars since the early '80s.

Which is why during the whole "government shut down scare" the mail still would have been delivered.

I somewhat agree that $26+ an hour is a bit steep (heck that is more than I make in a technical position), I also don't know how hard it actually is to deliver mail. That may also include monies to pay for a vehicle. Not all postal carriers are issued vehicles. And they may have to pay for upkeep of them as well, if a private vehicle is used.

 

[Bunnykid68]

The postal service is an independent government agency. And has not received tax payer dollars since the early '80s.

Which is why during the whole "government shut down scare" the mail still would have been delivered.

I somewhat agree that $26+ an hour is a bit steep (heck that is more than I make in a technical position), I also don't know how hard it actually is to deliver mail. That may also include monies to pay for a vehicle. Not all postal carriers are issued vehicles. And they may have to pay for upkeep of them as well, if a private vehicle is used.

If you a have a 15 mile walking route like my dad had it is one hell of a workout, but not difficult. As far as rural routes go and people using their own vehicles I imagine they get paid mileage in one way or another. Shall ask my dad tomorrow. Not sure how they could be 3 billion..million whichever it was in the negative and not get money from taxpayers.....Wait a second, taxpayers buy stamps.

 

[SideArmed]

They have taken grants from the treasury in recent years due to the decline in mail service, no doubt. I can't recall exactly how much or when off the top of my head. I guess they did a pretty good job at it while they could, damn that Al Gore and his internet.

So they were self sufficient, but as far as I know they still do not "directly" take tax payer dollars.

 

[dross]

Really??? I pay taxes. Yes some of that is in theory returned to me in my paycheck, but I still have to pay in just as much to all the other bull as everyone else, like social security (what a joke), welfare, ect., and my money goes towards whatever goofy spending plans the GOV decides to come up with just as yours does.
I see where you are coming from on this though, since the money originated as tax payer dollars. But I still see the hits in the check every two weeks just like everyone else.
.

You are a net tax receiver. Any taxes you pay are just an accounting shuffle. A more honest, efficient, and less costly method would be to just exempt government employees from taxes and adjust their pay downward.

OK, so you just described my job. I make stuff, and I repair said made stuff and keep it in service for years and years and years.
.

If you work for the government, you don't make stuff in the way I meant it. Money is taken by force from the producers and then given to the government who parcels it out into the different agencies. The fact that in your particular job you might make something doesn't change that in order to make that thing it was first taken from someone making something the market wanted in order to make something that some politician wanted.

If you want me to explain more specifically, you'll have to be more forthcoming about exactly what you do.

 

[CarmelHP]

All government is overhead. Out of revenue earned from the sale of produced goods and services, the costs to produce those goods and services are subtracted for the gross margin, and the government gets its cut, regardless of the level of production or size of the margin, its still a cost that demands to be paid even if it entirely consumes or exceeds the gross margin.

 

[dross]

All government is overhead. Out of revenue earned from the sale of produced goods and services, the costs to produce those goods and services are subtracted for the gross margin, and the government gets its cut, regardless of the level of production or size of the margin, its still a cost that demands to be paid even if it entirely consumes or exceeds the gross margin.

I'd call it a parasitical relationship but that wouldn't be accurate unless the shark was the parasite and the pilot fish was the host.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I work as a private contractor for the DoD.

Even though we make stuff, and our job is necessary in order to carry out War around the globe, we'd all be better off if there were no war and all I had to make was stuff for corporations and private individuals.

 

[dross]

I work as a private contractor for the DoD.

Even though we make stuff, and our job is necessary in order to carry out War around the globe, we'd all be better off if there were no war and all I had to make was stuff for corporations and private individuals.

Repped for clear-headed thinking and lack of butthurtity.

That a job doesn't aid production is not a value judgment on that job.

 

[ATOMonkey]

It doesn't take a lot of smarts to figure out that war destroys wealth.

Well, as long as you can recognize that wealth is comprised of more than just a paycheck.

 

[hornadylnl]

It doesn't take a lot of smarts to figure out that war destroys wealth.

Well, as long as you can recognize that wealth is comprised of more than just a paycheck.

You mean I can't stand in a bucket and lift the handle to pick yourself up?

 

[Pocketman]

It doesn't take a lot of smarts to figure out that war destroys wealth.

Well, as long as you can recognize that wealth is comprised of more than just a paycheck.

War may destroy wealth in one place and build wealth in another. If my house gets destroyed, I lose wealth. The corporations that produced the bomb and its delivery system, gains wealth. The net is determined by what the bomb costs vs. the value of my house. This then begs two questions: Is it a good cost/benefit decision to destroy a mud shack with a $50,000 bomb? Secondly, are there those who promote war so they can sell more goods and services to the governments waging war?

 

[ATOMonkey]

War may destroy wealth in one place and build wealth in another. If my house gets destroyed, I lose wealth. The corporations that produced the bomb and its delivery system, gains wealth. The net is determined by what the bomb costs vs. the value of my house. This then begs two questions: Is it a good cost/benefit decision to destroy a mud shack with a $50,000 bomb? Secondly, are there those who promote war so they can sell more goods and services to the governments waging war?

There is still a net loss though. Who paid to make the bomb? When the bomb is blown up, what do you have left?

You tax people, reducing their wealth, in order to make something that you will destroy, along with someone else's property.

So, everyone loses.

Even if you tax the people to make the planes, that you use to blow up something, now you have a plane that no one can use to make money. It's still a net loss.

The only way you can recoup costs is by "de-militarizing" your military equipment. You can do that with some stuff, but not much.

 

[SideArmed]

I work as a private contractor for the DoD.

Even though we make stuff, and our job is necessary in order to carry out War around the globe, we'd all be better off if there were no war and all I had to make was stuff for corporations and private individuals.

I was a contractor with the GOV for a number of years, and agree that the time and effort put into waging war would be much better suited going elsewhere. After my time in the Navy I decided to take that training and keep on with the DON and try to change things from within and spend my days trying to reduce the costs and expenditures from within. Not an ideal situation and I know I am just one person, but if I can save a little money by changing procedure and policy doing my job, then maybe that can work it's way up the chain.

Repped for clear-headed thinking and lack of butthurtity.

That a job doesn't aid production is not a value judgment on that job.

I hope you don't think I am/was butthurt by your comments. I am truly interested in hearing thoughts on the matter and as stated above I do not fall into the typical "government worker" catagory. I am just as upset/irritated by the laziness and apathetic behavior around me as everyone else is. And knowing that I am being paid utilizing other's hard earned moneys I try to do the best job that I can and reduce that cost as much as possible.

 

[dross]

War may destroy wealth in one place and build wealth in another. If my house gets destroyed, I lose wealth. The corporations that produced the bomb and its delivery system, gains wealth. The net is determined by what the bomb costs vs. the value of my house. This then begs two questions: Is it a good cost/benefit decision to destroy a mud shack with a $50,000 bomb? Secondly, are there those who promote war so they can sell more goods and services to the governments waging war?

This is the broken window fallacy raising it's head again. The fact that one person may benefit from what is an overall loss in productivity is not the same as wealth being created.

Another note, and please don't take this personally, but I see it a lot and it's a pet peeve of mine.

"Begging the question," doesn't mean that a question needs to be asked. Begging the question is a logical fallacy that means that one of your premeses is actually based on your conclusion. So, begging the question means that you're asking too much of the question, asking it to deliver more than it can logically deliver. An example of begging the question:

A: George Bush is a liar.
B: How do you know?
A: Because he lied about WMD.
B: Why do you think he lied about WMD and wasn't just mistaken?
A: Because he's a liar.

 

[Pocketman]

This is the broken window fallacy raising it's head again. The fact that one person may benefit from what is an overall loss in productivity is not the same as wealth being created.

I concede your point (and ATOMonkey's) that "overall" wealth is diminished. Point I was trying to make is that people tend to look at wealth from their own perspective.

Another note, and please don't take this personally, but I see it a lot and it's a pet peeve of mine.

"Begging the question," doesn't mean that a question needs to be asked. Begging the question is a logical fallacy that means that one of your premeses is actually based on your conclusion. So, begging the question means that you're asking too much of the question, asking it to deliver more than it can logically deliver. An example of begging the question:

A: George Bush is a liar.
B: How do you know?
A: Because he lied about WMD.
B: Why do you think he lied about WMD and wasn't just mistaken?
A: Because he's a liar.

Not taken as personal. I consider this another enlightenment.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I concede your point (and ATOMonkey's) that "overall" wealth is diminished. Point I was trying to make is that people tend to look at wealth from their own perspective.

Absolutely right, which is where the Keynesian always makes a fatal logic error. They only focus on a small sector for a short time period instead of the whole picture for the long term.

You can't make something from nothing, unless you subscribe to the theory that you can borrow yourself into prosperity.

I like to think of Keynesians as underpants gnomes.

Step 1) Borrow money and spend it on anything

Step 2)

Step 3) Pay back loan through increased economic activity.

 

[level.eleven]

Our friend, the Broken Window.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG3AKoL0vEs[/ame]