What's an optimal level of government spending?

[SmarterthanYou]

Why? And what do you define as "necessary"?

look at todays economic situation and you have your 'why'. necessary would be that amount required to run the minimum government essentials only.

 

[Matt Dillon]

You know you aren't ACTUALLY Matt Dillon, right? LOL at you.

The thought has crossed through my mind...

Doesn't mean I didn't stop a girl's dad from abusing her mom and her and her siblings, bitch.

It was the right thing to do. I also stole a Thai stick from her mom's truck. That probably wasn't the right thing to do, but I got high.

Things are what they are.

 

[Mina]

I know several girls like that

Me, too. I run in highly accomplished circles. People like that are always very conscious of where they stand relative to others, and what others are doing differently, because that consciousness is a part of knowing when and how to improve.

 

[Mina]

Positive ROI by definition pays for itself.

Yes. And higher positive ROI pays even more. That's the point I'm making. It's a pretty elementary concept in finance -- like if there's an investment available that will get me 0.1% above inflation over the next 20 years, if I lock it up that long, even though that's technically a positive ROI, it's also a garbage investment, since I have lots of options likely to pay a lot better. So, I don't think it's enough to simply require that spending have a positive ROI for it to be optimal. We'd also need to know what the opportunity cost is, in terms of the private-sector spending that would have happened if the government weren't using the money.

Anyway, I think generally we under-invest, by way of government, so I think this is more of a theoretical issue in the US... but it could be a more significant problem in countries that may have too much government spending as a share of GDP (e.g., France or Denmark).

 

[Matt Dillon]

Me, too. I run in highly accomplished circles. People like that are always very conscious of where they stand relative to others, and what others are doing differently, because that consciousness is a part of knowing when and how to improve.

Da fuq are you doing here?

 

[Mina]

We already cant borrow enough money as the lenders have been dialing back lending for a decade or so. Thats why the Fed is printing money and inflation is soaring.

Socialism is fine until you run out of other people's money.

If you want more revenue you MUST expand the economy.

The Fed borrows money very easily, which is why rates on treasuries are so low.

 

[Mina]

Da fuq are you doing here?

Schooling you.

 

[Matt Dillon]

Schooling you.

No.

You do not have the chops or credentials, sorry.

 

[Mina]

look at todays economic situation and you have your 'why'.

We have almost no unemployment and just came off a year with the best GDP growth in almost four decades.
Is that what you're referring to?

necessary would be that amount required to run the minimum government essentials only.

What are those, specifically?

 

[Matt Dillon]

We have almost no unemployment and just came off a year with the best GDP growth in almost four decades.
Is that what you're referring to?



What are those, specifically?

When was the last time you made $850/wk?

Half past never? STFU then.

 

[Mina]

No.

You do not have the chops or credentials, sorry.

In the present case, it doesn't take much in either category. A decent junior high education is more than sufficient.

 

[Mina]

When was the last time you made $850/wk?

Probably some summer job during college. These days it's more like $4,800/wk.

 

[zymurgy]

With less than 5 percent of world population, the U.S. uses one-third of the world’s paper, a quarter of the world’s oil, 23 percent of the coal, 27 percent of the aluminum, and 19 percent of the copper

This is why progressives are actually a danger and have no real solutions to pollution and over consumption. If we let you run with your ideas it will be even worse.

class envy is idiotic - allowing the masses to consume more - by taking from the few is no solution. it will make the one nation that already overconsumes - over consume even worse

Why do thousands line up at our Southern border to get in? because as much as the cry babies think poverty in this country is bad - they have no idea what bad poverty actually looks like - the thousands of unskilled workers dying to get in would be happy with a fraction of what progressives say is a non living wage

 

[Matt Dillon]

Probably some summer job during college. These days it's more like $4,800/wk.

Bullshit. In the 1st place, no summer job pays that. That's contractor pay, oh ye who has never really worked.

In the 2nd place, you're lying.

Owait, unless you were stripping as a job. I forgot about that.

Unless stripping was your summer job, you did not make $850+ a week.

I say your claiming so proves you to be a liar.

 

[Mina]

Bullshit. In the 1st place, no summer job pays that. That's contractor pay, oh ye who has never really worked.

In the 2nd place, you're lying.

I do financial consulting for big companies working M&A deals.

 

[Matt Dillon]

Probably some summer job during college. These days it's more like $4,800/wk.

So you were a stripper during college?

 

[Matt Dillon]

I do financial consulting for big companies working M&A deals.

Suuure ya do.

Why is it you don't care about all those less fortunate than you?

"big companies" What a fucking whopper of a lie.

Bitch, you probably got a Platinum EBT card.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

It's a distinction without a difference, from my perspective. Either way, a change in policy can drive up deficits in exchange for an ROI, which may or may not pay for itself in the long run.

government should be a loss leader.

 

[Matt Dillon]

In the present case, it doesn't take much in either category. A decent junior high education is more than sufficient.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Positive ROI by definition pays for itself. I don't see them as a distinction without a difference. In fact I think the distinction is critical in discussing these issues in such a partisan environment. The fact is that red 'team' wants only tax cuts, and they seem uninterested in the ROI on those tax cuts. They most certainly do not care about the ROI on deficit spending.

should government be for profit venture?