What's an optimal level of government spending?

[Matt Dillon]

Not as bad way to earn a living, if you've got the assets. It's not a great long-term plan, though.

Is that why you only did it in college?

I'm just BSing. I know you were never hot enough to be a stripper and never made $850/wk or more.

I do know you're a liar and will lie and lie and lie.

You're a leftist, that's what leftists do.

I worked my way through college with being a bagboy and a dishwasher.

Ofc it didn't cost as much then as now, thanks, leftists!

Also, Uncle Sam picked up the tab for the rest of it because I had the grades, babydoll. Advanced college classes, even, all As.

All As and then some. I wasn't the highest, fuckin' aye some people got some motivation.

UT was courtin' me; though. That's the private rich school, babydoll. I know a dude that went there, he's cool AF.. He's a Bostonian real yankee, but he's cool AF.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Was that for me? I didn't say anything about inflating debt away.

so you agree it's a spurious selling point for inflation?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Higher than normal. As in all economies, there are good features and bad.

and the unemployment numbers are not truly representative of what the jobs market is at this time either.

Unfortunately, conservatives tend to use "unconstitutional" as a way to refer to any program they don't personally happen to like.

I'm not a conservative. I'm a Libertarian who uses 'unconstitutional' when something truly is unconstitutional. As a Libertarian, I can accept programs I don't like if there's a valid constitutional power there.

 

[zymurgy]

It would be absolutely sub-optimal. It would be a financial disaster. Imagine a world where there are no roads to deliver goods. Imagine a world where there is no judicial system to decide disputes. To go to such a world would see GDP drop to almost nothing.

how would it be a financial disaster to reach a state where everyone that used a good or service could afford it - and government isn't needed to help those that fall though the cracks because nobody falls though the cracks

sounds pretty fucking optimal to me - but then, I actually understand the meanings of words, unlike so many here - like the OP - and you

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

It would be absolutely sub-optimal. It would be a financial disaster. Imagine a world where there are no roads to deliver goods. Imagine a world where there is no judicial system to decide disputes. To go to such a world would see GDP drop to almost nothing.

you're leaving out the possibility of a bright future of unknowns that might possibly be unrelated to tyrannizing others.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Quite the contrary. Conservatives tend to like clearly unconstitutional programs, like attempts by government to promote favored religions.

omg.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

Not as bad way to earn a living, if you've got the assets. It's not a great long-term plan, though.

Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That’s why it is called the present. doy.

 

[zymurgy]

Quite the contrary. Conservatives tend to like clearly unconstitutional programs, like attempts by government to promote favored religions.

what you claim is unconstitutional was constitutional until we fought a war over slavery.

nobody that fought that war thought they were fighting a war over religious freedoms in their state - point being what you claim is a right is very much like Row v Wade and can be undone the same way it was done - via judicial review

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

how would it be a financial disaster to reach a state where everyone that used a good or service could afford it - and government isn't needed to help those that fall though the cracks because nobody falls though the cracks

sounds pretty fucking optimal to me - but then, I actually understand the meanings of words, unlike so many here - like the OP - and you

What you described is completely unworkable. How do you propose to build and maintain roads? Or are you simply replacing the word "tax" with "fee" and pretending that fees are not taxes paid to a government?

 

[Mina]

I can't quite see that. Where is it?

A great many of my posts are about policies intended to help the less fortunate. For example, this one is arguing that we should boost non-defense governmental spending.... a position that's quite popular among those who focus on helping the less fortunate, but quite unpopular among those focused on comforting the comfortable by afflicting the afflicated.

 

[Matt Dillon]

A great many of my posts are about policies intended to help the less fortunate. For example, this one is arguing that we should boost non-defense governmental spending.... a position that's quite popular among those who focus on helping the less fortunate, but quite unpopular among those focused on comforting the comfortable by afflicting the afflicated.

How does that help people get jobs? America is not a welfare state, never has been.

Have you never heard the story of the 1st colonists? Real Americans don't want any handouts, they just want to be able to make it for themselves.

Wtf is this welfare handout bullshit you're pushing?

Fuck that! Take your ass out in the woods in the middle of nowhere in America and see how far that bullshit gets ya.

The next tree doesn't accept EBT cards, sorry. I wish the next Walmart cashier didn't, but that's a different story.

 

[Mina]

I'm just BSing. I know you were never hot enough to be a stripper and never made $850/wk or more.

Your incredulity about that figure is so strange to me. In my line of work, we literally count ourselves fortunate if we can line up a decent secretary for less than $25/hour. Meanwhile, people straight out of school can be making twice that, easily. Heck, brand spanking new lawyers at the firms we work with pull down $215,000 per year as first year associates, not counting bonuses (and they get billed out at $700/hour).

Also, Uncle Sam picked up the tab for the rest

That's great. Even though some of my taxes may be going to cover debt the government ran up to pay part of your education back then, I'm happy to help. You're welcome.

 

[Mina]

so you agree it's a spurious selling point for inflation?

I can't say I've ever run into someone trying to "sell inflation," at least when it comes to inflation rates that are much above Fed targets. At best, people argue that we shouldn't overreact to inflation in the range we have right now, since even though it's not ideal, it does have some side benefits, like decreasing the real value of our debt, and coaxing money off of the sidelines. I think those are fair points, though, as I said, the benefit of inflation in decreasing the real value of public debt is generally going to be a short-term benefit only, because sooner or later people with money will respond by demanding higher interest rates, in anticipation of that inflation.

 

[zymurgy]

What you described is completely unworkable. How do you propose to build and maintain roads? Or are you simply replacing the word "tax" with "fee" and pretending that fees are not taxes paid to a government?

aah - the 'ol unworkable angle. last vestige of those that can't debate

do I also pretend my gym membership fee is a tax and that without government, we can't build workout facilities?

 

[Matt Dillon]

Your incredulity about that figure is so strange to me. In my line of work, we literally count ourselves fortunate if we can line up a decent secretary for less than $25/hour. Meanwhile, people straight out of school can be making twice that, easily. Heck, brand spanking new lawyers at the firms we work with pull down $215,000 per year as first year associates, not counting bonuses (and they get billed out at $700/hour).



That's great. Even though some of my taxes may be going to cover debt the government ran up to pay part of your education back then, I'm happy to help. You're welcome.

You're full of shit right up to the top of your head. Probably never done a day of work in your entire life. Bitch.

My education was paid for by people way before you came along. Don't worry, you never contributed ary a dime to it.

It was all over with and done before you were conceived and subsequently indoctrinated.

 

[Mina]

and the unemployment numbers are not truly representative of what the jobs market is at this time either.

True. It's even tighter than the unemployment numbers would have you believe. Like currently we're at 3.6% unemployment, which is slightly worse than we were at this point in 1968 (3.5%). But currently the labor force participation rate is 62.2%, whereas at this point in 1968 it was just 59.5%. All those people, back then, who weren't even looking for work didn't count as "unemployed." So, when you instead flip things on their head and look at the employment-population ratio, you find out that right now 60.0% of all potential workers have a job, versus just 57.4% back at this point in 1968. That's part of why employers are getting so desperate... it's not like there are a lot of non-working people on the sidelines who they could potentially coax into the labor force with the right offer, the way there had been in earlier generations, when we had such a large pool of women who weren't working outside the home. At this point, those who aren't currently in the labor force are mostly elderly retirees with fat retirement incomes who have no internet in working, or young people in college or in training who aren't going to be interested in working until they have the skills needed for good pay.

 

[Mina]

My education was paid for by people way before you came along.

Given your lack of anything approaching manners or decorum, I'd assumed you were fairly young. However, even if you're elderly, the point is we haven't had all our debt paid down since we borrowed money to pay for part of your education, so some share of that cost is still showing up in our debt service payments, which in turn is coming out of the paychecks of those like me who work for a living. So, you're welcome.

 

[Mina]

How does that help people get jobs?

That depends on what we spend the money on, of course. But, it's worth pointing out that some of those countries I listed that have higher government spending as a share of GDP also have higher employment rates among prime-age workers. You can see that here:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=Pgcv

Partly that's because it's easier to get a job outside the home if you have affordable childcare, and childcare can be made more affordable if that's something the government focuses on.

America is not a welfare state, never has been.

It is. Economists have generally counted the US among the welfare states at least since the mid-1930's, when the government started taking on roles such as making sure elderly people weren't left in poverty.

Have you never heard the story of the 1st colonists?

The Vikings? Sure. As I recall they got wiped out fairly quickly.

Real Americans don't want any handouts, they just want to be able to make it for themselves.

Weren't you just telling me about the handouts you got to get through college?

 

[Matt Dillon]

Given your lack of anything approaching manners or decorum, I'd assumed you were fairly young. However, even if you're elderly, the point is we haven't had all our debt paid down since we borrowed money to pay for part of your education, so some share of that cost is still showing up in our debt service payments, which in turn is coming out of the paychecks of those like me who work for a living. So, you're welcome.

Yeah, here's what you seem to be incapable of realizing: My education was paid for before you were born, and I deserved it because my grades were just that good.

You never contributed ary a thing to it, girl. That all happened before you were even conceived, ok?

You work for "a living" do ya? Doing what?

I worked for a living while I was going to school. Washing dishes and I had a bagboy job too.

That was for gas and book money. I lived at my own or a relative's residences.

 

[Truck Fump / h1b]

I can't say I've ever run into someone trying to "sell inflation," at least when it comes to inflation rates that are much above Fed targets. At best, people argue that we shouldn't overreact to inflation in the range we have right now, since even though it's not ideal, it does have some side benefits, like decreasing the real value of our debt, and coaxing money off of the sidelines. I think those are fair points, though, as I said, the benefit of inflation in decreasing the real value of public debt is generally going to be a short-term benefit only, because sooner or later people with money will respond by demanding higher interest rates, in anticipation of that inflation.

keynesians always are trying to sell inflation.