Useless investigations coming in the House

[Zebo]

This always cracks me up when people are talking politics. I am amazed that people are gullible enough to believe the government can actually do anything to create real jobs. The only thing they can do regarding jobs is destroy them. They have been good at that for decades.


Government jobs are not real jobs, they are merely dependents....dependent upon the rest of us with real jobs. The government is a consumer of wealth, not a creator. Another distinction many seem to overlook. Essentially the government is a leech albeit an essential one. The government has an important role, but that role has been way over stepped for so long with the result being our current predicament. People are stupid so the only real solution is for everything to completely crash so we can start fresh. It is coming to a country near you real soon.

Almost every profession is a leech. There are only 3 wealth creators. You can mine something, manufacture something, or grow something. Everything, and i mean everything else, CDO pimping, policing, paper-pushing, sales, doctoring - are skimming off other's production. Not sure why Government skimmers get special singling out since we are governed by consent.

 

[piasabird]

There is not much that the "Governemnt" does that is essential.

 

[PeshakJang]

Not sure why Government skimmers get special singling out since we are governed by consent.

How many government jobs fall into the wealth creation categories that you outlined?

 

[QuantumPion]

Almost every profession is a leech. There are only 3 wealth creators. You can mine something, manufacture something, or grow something. Everything, and i mean everything else, CDO pimping, policing, paper-pushing, sales, doctoring - are skimming off other's production. Not sure why Government skimmers get special singling out since we are governed by consent.

You think Michael Jackson never created wealth? You think Bill Gates never created wealth? Maybe you should take a basic economics course. Any labor creates wealth as long as its output has greater value than its input.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Zebo Almost every profession is a leech. There are only 3 wealth creators. You can mine something, manufacture something, or grow something. Everything, and i mean everything else, CDO pimping, policing, paper-pushing, sales, doctoring - are skimming off other's production. Not sure why Government skimmers get special singling out since we are governed by consent.


You think Michael Jackson never created wealth? You think Bill Gates never created wealth? Maybe you should take a basic economics course. Any labor creates wealth as long as its output has greater value than its input. __________________ Reaching into one's own pockets to assist his fellow man in need is praiseworthy and laudable. Reaching into someone else's pockets to do so is despicable and deserves condemnation.

I agree with QP, there are far more ways to create wealth than mfg, mining, and farming.

 

[LunarRay]

I agree with QP, there are far more ways to create wealth than mfg, mining, and farming.

Do you think that taking a dollar from my pocket and giving it to Michael Jackson created wealth or was it a transfer of wealth?

 

[Pneumothorax]

Almost every profession is a leech. There are only 3 wealth creators. You can mine something, manufacture something, or grow something. Everything, and i mean everything else, CDO pimping, policing, paper-pushing, sales, doctoring - are skimming off other's production. Not sure why Government skimmers get special singling out since we are governed by consent.

Hey at least I can choose whose widget to buy and whose music to listen to. .gov gives me no choice in the matter and will put me in jail if I don't pay for the things I don't want.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Do you think that taking a dollar from my pocket and giving it to Michael Jackson created wealth or was it a transfer of wealth?

LPs, tapes, CDs, videos, concert tours... a lot of people besides Michael Jackson made a good living off his alleged music.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Do you think that taking a dollar from my pocket and giving it to Michael Jackson created wealth or was it a transfer of wealth?

I doubt you ever payed MJ directly but when he created copyrightable music that people would buy he was certainly creating wealth. Even after his death his estate is selling the wealth that he created.

Same with Bill Gates, everytime a copy of Windows is sold they are selling more than the manufactured product of a program on a disc, they are selling the intelectual property that Gates and company created.

 

[LunarRay]

I doubt you ever payed MJ directly but when he created copyrightable music that people would buy he was certainly creating wealth. Even after his death his estate is selling the wealth that he created.

Same with Bill Gates, everytime a copy of Windows is sold they are selling more than the manufactured product of a program on a disc, they are selling the intelectual property that Gates and company created.

Well... let me ask it this way and more specifically to your statement.

Firstly, I'd opine that Manufacturing produces wealth while Service consumes wealth.

Manufacturing something is the taking of raw materials and adding direct labor and 'overhead' to produce a something that if it sells for more than the cost input creates wealth.

What is at variance with the above in what Gates or Jackson do or did?

Is there not Direct Labor and Overhead applied to something? Where are the raw materials you may ask? In this case I'd loosely opine that the raw materials consumed are intangibles... The brain power of idea. As the
Artisan made a chair the Musician makes a song and the Software Engineer makes a program.

That is how I view it in any case.

 

[QuantumPion]

Well... let me ask it this way and more specifically to your statement.

Firstly, I'd opine that Manufacturing produces wealth while Service consumes wealth.

Manufacturing something is the taking of raw materials and adding direct labor and 'overhead' to produce a something that if it sells for more than the cost input creates wealth.

What is at variance with the above in what Gates or Jackson do or did?

Is there not Direct Labor and Overhead applied to something? Where are the raw materials you may ask? In this case I'd loosely opine that the raw materials consumed are intangibles... The brain power of idea. As the
Artisan made a chair the Musician makes a song and the Software Engineer makes a program.

That is how I view it in any case.

What do you consider a service that consumes wealth? Government services consume wealth, but this is a characteristic of bureaucracy, not all services in general.

 

[QuantumPion]

Do you think that taking a dollar from my pocket and giving it to Michael Jackson created wealth or was it a transfer of wealth?

Wealth was created when Michael Jackson recorded/performed music which you then willingly bought with your own money (which was similarly earned by producing wealth in some other manner for someone else).

 

[piasabird]

So by interpretation, any investigation of a democrat is a useless investigation. Doesnt matter if they are guilty or not because all Republicans are evil heartless people who want to kill your grandparents, poison the air, and starve your children.

 

[Fern]

-snip-
Firstly, I'd opine that Manufacturing produces wealth while Service consumes wealth.

Manufacturing something is the taking of raw materials and adding direct labor and 'overhead' to produce a something that if it sells for more than the cost input creates wealth.

Depends on what you mean by "services".

If you mean government services, yes, much is reallocating and consuming. However, the core government services such as transportation, communication and (electric) utilities enhance the capabilities of private sector manufacturing etc. It's great to take a wagon and blaze a trail through the Rockies etc., but if you really want to move raw resources and products the interstate system, railways, airports and seaports are sooo much better.

Otherwise, what many people refer to as "services" (engineering, accounting, consulting, distribution, sales people etc) also support and enhance manufacturing. Ensuring the current manufacturing process is operating efficiently, or creating new one even more efficient, creates wealth too.

Anything that allows you to produce more with less is creating wealth. This is where many service are key.

Fern

 

[LunarRay]

Depends on what you mean by "services".

If you mean government services, yes, much is reallocating and consuming. However, the core government services such as transportation, communication and (electric) utilities enhance the capabilities of private sector manufacturing etc. It's great to take a wagon and blaze a trail through the Rockies etc., but if you really want to move raw resources and products the interstate system, railways, airports and seaports are sooo much better.

Otherwise, what many people refer to as "services" (engineering, accounting, consulting, distribution, sales people etc) also support and enhance manufacturing. Ensuring the current manufacturing process is operating efficiently, or creating new one even more efficient, creates wealth too.

Anything that allows you to produce more with less is creating wealth. This is where many service are key.

Fern

Well... what I mean is: In general... Service redistributes wealth while consuming some of it. Government Services consumes wealth... Visualize a hungry snake eating its own tale... (From a Macroeconomic view) Although arguably one might say that if Government created a rapid transit train that might be creating wealth... I'd argue that it is a stimulus to induce the creation of wealth where the folks involved interact by design or otherwise... and a consumption of wealth by the Government.

IOW, my view of it all is that you may have a thriving economy by using the efforts of other economies and attach your Service bit to that but that is a pseudo creation of wealth... or myth from the purist sense... If I'm a buyer of China's goods for resale in the US as a Service broker and I've made a profit (hopefully) that might be construed as wealth creation... but I'd call it wealth consumption. The wealth creation was and will remain with the Chinese...

hehehehe but many economists who support NAFTA and other adventures of similar ilk would argue differently...

 

[QuantumPion]

If I'm a buyer of China's goods for resale in the US as a Service broker and I've made a profit (hopefully) that might be construed as wealth creation... but I'd call it wealth consumption.

Well you'd be wrong. Just because you have an emotional bias against certain types of jobs for whatever reason doesn't mean they don't serve a beneficial purpose of generating wealth.