'Red Scares'
in [Drive]
|
Prev: The Stupidity of Racism
Next: European Socialsm
From: Dave Head on 28 Jul 2010 20:27 On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 14:25:45 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everything(a)Blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote: >On 7/28/2010 5:15 AM, Dave Head wrote: >> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 00:52:48 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty >> <Then-Destroy-Everything(a)Blackhole.NebulaX.com> wrote: >> >>> Government employees get paid more than the private sector. >> >> BS. Has never been true either of the 2 places I've worked as an >> engineer. Any gov't engineer can quit the gov't and have instantly >> higher salary in the private sector. >> >>>> and have to make a profit to boot. That also adds to the cost. Gov't >>>> workers don't have to produce a profit, just the software. >>> >>> >>> And that's why they waste more and produce nothing. They aren't even >>> self sufficient. >> >> You have no idea what you're talking about. >If they made any money then we'd not be paying all that tax to pay them. Best we can do is not cost as much as it would cost to do the same thing with private industry, and we achieve that.
From: Dave Head on 28 Jul 2010 20:31 On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 05:04:44 -0700 (PDT), Larry G <gross.larry(a)gmail.com> wrote: >"productivity" ...believe it or not .. includes re-building homes >after a hurricane... Sure. >or putting in a new highway that is a convenience >but not a necessity... If the cost-benefit analysis indicates that the highway will result in less overall cost to the public by building it rather than not building it, then it will be built. The "convenience" of driving 12 less miles to get somewhere is translatable into saved gasoline, saved maintenance on cars, saved tire wear, and saved time. If its worth it, then the road gets built. >and producing thousands of useless military >items that got upgraded and no longer used. Yeah, they're useless, until you or someone you care about is riding down a foreign highway noted for IEDs in a big, heavy MRAP that will take a decent hit, as opposed to a Humvee that will get you or your significant other killed in a much lesser explosion. Dave Head
From: Larry G on 29 Jul 2010 08:14 On Jul 28, 8:31 pm, Dave Head <rally...(a)att.net> wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 05:04:44 -0700 (PDT), Larry G > > <gross.la...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >"productivity" ...believe it or not .. includes re-building homes > >after a hurricane... > > Sure. > > >or putting in a new highway that is a convenience > >but not a necessity... > > If the cost-benefit analysis indicates that the highway will result in > less overall cost to the public by building it rather than not > building it, then it will be built. The "convenience" of driving 12 > less miles to get somewhere is translatable into saved gasoline, saved > maintenance on cars, saved tire wear, and saved time. If its worth > it, then the road gets built. that's not how they typically do cost-benefit though. and when you run the same numbers for the same road but tolled - the demand changes. In other words, when it's directly user-pays the numbers change from a (perceived) free road. > > >and producing thousands of useless military > >items that got upgraded and no longer used. > > Yeah, they're useless, until you or someone you care about is riding > down a foreign highway noted for IEDs in a big, heavy MRAP that will > take a decent hit, as opposed to a Humvee that will get you or your > significant other killed in a much lesser explosion. I'm talking about the millions of other items that are replaced by newer, updated items that then get sold for pennies on the dollar at surplus auctions.
From: Larry G on 29 Jul 2010 08:17 On Jul 28, 8:31 pm, Dave Head <rally...(a)att.net> wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 05:04:44 -0700 (PDT), Larry G > > <gross.la...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >"productivity" ...believe it or not .. includes re-building homes > >after a hurricane... > > Sure. > > >or putting in a new highway that is a convenience > >but not a necessity... > > If the cost-benefit analysis indicates that the highway will result in > less overall cost to the public by building it rather than not > building it, then it will be built. The "convenience" of driving 12 > less miles to get somewhere is translatable into saved gasoline, saved > maintenance on cars, saved tire wear, and saved time. If its worth > it, then the road gets built. > > >and producing thousands of useless military > >items that got upgraded and no longer used. > > Yeah, they're useless, until you or someone you care about is riding > down a foreign highway noted for IEDs in a big, heavy MRAP that will > take a decent hit, as opposed to a Humvee that will get you or your > significant other killed in a much lesser explosion. > > Dave Head remember also, we're talking about "productivity" and about taxes taken from people and spent on "something". It' s been my experience that guys like you don't object to taxes for the things you think or important but you opposed those for things you don't agree with but the point is - whether it's a Humvee or a Highway and a Superfund site - the taxes are collected and the money spent - and it provides jobs and stimulates the economy no different than if that money stayed in the private sector and was spent on a BMW.
From: Dave Head on 30 Jul 2010 02:01
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 05:14:42 -0700 (PDT), Larry G <gross.larry(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On Jul 28, 8:31�pm, Dave Head <rally...(a)att.net> wrote: >> On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 05:04:44 -0700 (PDT), Larry G >> >> <gross.la...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >"productivity" ...believe it or not .. includes re-building homes >> >after a hurricane... >> >> Sure. >> >> >or putting in a new highway that is a convenience >> >but not a necessity... >> >> If the cost-benefit analysis indicates that the highway will result in >> less overall cost to the public by building it rather than not >> building it, then it will be built. �The "convenience" of driving 12 >> less miles to get somewhere is translatable into saved gasoline, saved >> maintenance on cars, saved tire wear, and saved time. �If its worth >> it, then the road gets built. > >that's not how they typically do cost-benefit though. and when you run >the same numbers for the same road but tolled - the demand changes. >In other words, when it's directly user-pays the numbers change from a >(perceived) free road. >> >> >and producing thousands of useless military >> >items that got upgraded and no longer used. >> >> Yeah, they're useless, until you or someone you care about is riding >> down a foreign highway noted for IEDs in a big, heavy MRAP that will >> take a decent hit, as opposed to a Humvee that will get you or your >> significant other killed in a much lesser explosion. > >I'm talking about the millions of other items that are replaced by >newer, updated items that then get sold for pennies on the dollar at >surplus auctions. What do you expect? Its obsolete. World's best military is a competitive thing - its like trying to win Formula 1 - its expensive. > |