The easy way to look at the U.S. budget

BradleyT2p2 said:
First off I agree that our government spends money like a bunch of tards and something seriously has to be done.

However family debt is usually just personal crap that they buy. The government debt creates jobs, goods and services, products for export, etc...
Click to expand...

Actually, it does the opposite. It may create a few jobs but in the long run their "employee's" destroy them.

Further more, Obama wants to create charity jobs. Creating them for no other reason but to create employment. Watch what happens when he starts doing that crap...
 


BradleyT2p2 said:
The government debt creates jobs, goods and services, products for export, etc...
Click to expand...

Could you please explain your reasoning behind this statement? How does the government create jobs? What are they doing to produce goods and services? What products for exports does the government produce?
 
cziffra said:
‪The Broken Window Fallacy (no accents)‬‏ - YouTube
Click to expand...

The video demonstrates one of many misguided notions people have about the state's role in creating or increasing prosperity. As many of you realize, the state can only reallocate capital, labor, land, etc. through coercion. In doing so, it props up and protects less-efficient producers. The result is higher prices, shortages (not to be confused with scarcity), and less prosperity.

Every tax, every tariff, every subsidy, every piece of legislation that disrupts the flow of capital and labor outside the price system erodes wealth for the community. Or at the very least, the disruption causes less wealth to be created than would otherwise occur.

Some people (e.g. farmers, Wall Street, unionized workers, etc.) benefit. Most people are harmed. Oddly, the people who are most often harmed buy into the bullshit - hook, line, and sinker. The majority go to the polls to vote for more.


On a related note, I encourage you guys to read this book...


B072.jpg



Buy | Free PDF

If you've read it in the past, read it again. You might marvel at how durable some economic fallacies have proven since the 1940s, despite being repeatedly debunked over the years.

If anything, it is a testament to how simple it is to manipulate voters.
 
ly2 from WF said:
The government isn't creating anything, the government is just a parasite sucking the life(money) out of people and companies. They create nothing but waste.

Jesus christ.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The government doesn't have the ability to create anything because it has no resources. In order to create it must take. It's like trying to fill the shallow end of a pool by taking water from the deep end.
 
JakeStratham said:
The video demonstrates one of many misguided notions people have about the state's role in creating or increasing prosperity. As many of you realize, the state can only reallocate capital, labor, land, etc. through coercion. In doing so, it props up and protects less-efficient producers. The result is higher prices, shortages (not to be confused with scarcity), and less prosperity.

Every tax, every tariff, every subsidy, every piece of legislation that disrupts the flow of capital and labor outside the price system erodes wealth for the community. Or at the very least, the disruption causes less wealth to be created than would otherwise occur.

Some people (e.g. farmers, Wall Street, unionized workers, etc.) benefit. Most people are harmed. Oddly, the people who are most often harmed buy into the bullshit - hook, line, and sinker. The majority go to the polls to vote for more.


On a related note, I encourage you guys to read this book...


B072.jpg



Buy | Free PDF

If you've read it in the past, read it again. You might marvel at how durable some economic fallacies have proven since the 1940s, despite being repeatedly debunked over the years.

If anything, it is a testament to how simple it is to manipulate voters.
Click to expand...

That's an awesome read - real eye-opener. Why it's not required reading in schools is beyond me...
 
Grindstone said:
- Coming up with an extra $50k-$150k in budgetary expenses every year at fiscal year end because "if we don't spend it this year, we won't get it next year", which is the mindset of 99% of bureaucratic types that I worked with.
Click to expand...

I think I heard that statement from every single department head (people who make their departments budget) when I was in high school.
 
megatabbers said:
That's an awesome read - real eye-opener. Why it's not required reading in schools is beyond me...
Click to expand...

I agree. Here's the funny thing... a lot of people will read that book, agree with Hazlitt's positions, and then completely abandon them.

Case in point: I have an old friend who is a devoted Marxist. When he was in college, one of his economics professors assigned Hazlitt's book. My friend read it, and thoroughly enjoyed it. He even bought a copy for himself, which he has kept for decades. More to the point, he agreed with Hazlitt's positions.

But he has abandoned them because they do not fit his perception of how the world should work. He considers himself a humanitarian, and loathes industry because it (supposedly) exploits laborers and consumers. I remind him that his brand of humanitarianism requires aggression and sometimes murder.

And around and around we go.

The point is, people tend to be emotional, and willing to set aside economic science - when they can be bothered to investigate it in the first place - because it doesn't fit their ideal.

Given that, as d_diggler said, it's tough to see a way back.


------

Side note: This guy gets it right...

Why unemployment persists - Opinion - ReviewJournal.com

h/t to Douglas French at Mises.
 
  • Like
Reactions: slayerment
papajohn56 said:
funny part is they think raising taxes is the miracle worker to end all this. so Mr. Jones gets a pay raise, and his income goes up to $25,000 - he's still spending $38,200.
Click to expand...

Alright so you are against any type of tax raises I take it?

My question to you is this. The budget was balanced and there was actually a surplus paying down the debt each yeah when GW took office. The tax cuts that he passed first thing immediately put a stop to this and changed it back to the US borrowing money each year. This only got worse because of economy/war/prescription drug benefit.

In hindsight would you still say those tax cuts were the right thing to do and overall have allowed the country to achieve a higher GDP then it otherwise would without the tax cut?

Personally I don't hold a strong opinion because I know I haven't spent enough time researching it to know.

One thing I do know though is that to come to any sort of a balance budget tax cuts will certainly not be the answer(although the tax code overall could use a significant overhaul) but the country will have to cope with significant cuts to medicaid. Modern medicine has simply got to good at keeping people alive at a very high price and makes the entire model for medicaid not work.

Most people just don't like the idea of letting old people that don't have money die from very treatable causes simply because it's to expensive to pay for. Or people of any age like that. But it might come to that to some extent.

The thing is I bet soon as the government stopped picking up the tab for these expensive treatments that very few old people are paying for cash currently - the prices will suddenly drop!
 
miketpowell said:
The thing is I bet soon as the government stopped picking up the tab for these expensive treatments that very few old people are paying for cash currently - the prices will suddenly drop!
Click to expand...

Give this man a cigar -

Stop all goverment funding / open up the provision of and insurance for and let private companies regulate it.

It'll hurt for a bit but there is money to be made so it'll develop into a competitive and so cheaper market after a period of adjustment, it's the only way and everyone will be better off in the long run.
 
People who blame the war on terror or bush tax cuts simply do not realize how serious of a fuck up the housing bubble was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom