Are the Dead From the Minneapolis Bridge Collapse Victims of Conservative Ideology?

OK, guyz ...

The next time you're pumping gas into your car, read what's posted on the gas pump regarding taxes. Those taxes are supposed to be going for roads and infrastructure. Where's the taxes going? Right into the general funds of the state and federal governments. Bridge to nowhere, anyone? How about a nonsensical trip for the Speaker of the House and her entourage to Syria? How about 30,000 freakin' trailers rotting away in Arkansas that were intended for Katrina victims in New Orleans? Or, perhaps you like the high tariffs on imported sugar, a subsidy for our sugar beet growers intended to keep foreign sugar out of the states ... causing us to keep on buying artificially high priced goods made with sugar? It goes on and on and on and on and on ... And yet, the first reaction of the DemoBats on this site to the bridge collapse is to raise taxes.

And then someone mentioned that the jobs paid for by the government with the new taxes to rebuild the infrasturcture would be great for the economy ... with nary a thought to the fact that the money to pay for those jobs is taken OUT of the economy in the first place. Go figure!

The problem with a lot of you is, you've accepted the old statist swan song of the free lunch.

Vi

why are bay area law enforcement officials throwing down 10 grand of my tax dollars in vegas strip clubs. read the news people. what do our taxes really pay for?

ViRedd said:

And then someone mentioned that the jobs paid for by the government with the new taxes to rebuild the infrasturcture would be great for the economy ... with nary a thought to the fact that the money to pay for those jobs is taken OUT of the economy in the first place. Go figure!

The problem with a lot of you is, you've accepted the old statist swan song of the free lunch.

Vi

Click to expand...

The money isn't taken out of the economy. It just does little to grow the money supply; "G" spending is accounted in GDP, too.

Plato Is Boring said:

The money isn't taken out of the economy. It just does little to grow the money supply; "G" spending is accounted in GDP, too.

Click to expand...

I think I'm missing something here, Plato. If taxes are extracted from the private sector for the government to "create jobs," aren't those taxes taken out of the economy? Tell me where I'm wrong.

Dank ...

Your absoultly correct. I'm NOT correct 100% of the time, but I'll settle for 99.9% of the time.

Vi

ViRedd said:

I think I'm missing something here, Plato. If taxes are extracted from the private sector for the government to "create jobs," aren't those taxes taken out of the economy? Tell me where I'm wrong.

Dank ...

Your absoultly correct. I'm NOT correct 100% of the time, but I'll settle for 99.9% of the time.

Vi

Click to expand...

Do you believe that the public sector isn't included in the overall economy? The two largest macro-measurements are real gdp and real gnp, both of which include public spending and transfers. Do you think there was a time when the u.s.s.r. was without an economy, aside from the underground market-economy? That's why it is called a command economy or centrally planned economy. Now if you're asking does it have an negative effect on the overall economy, that's debatable. I can think of countless ways (mostly all stolen from the Galbraiths) public spending can produce extremely positive long-term results for an economy.