Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.
Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
"We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008
i do recall that it unlocks quite the powerful mid-game civic...
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
i do recall that it unlocks quite the powerful mid-game civic...
Yes it does. Bureaucracy is great if you're restricted to just a few cities as it doubles the output of the capital. But on a large map and many cities, the corruption is out of hand and negates its usefulness.
However, I do believe it leads to the crossbowman or the longbowman.
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
given the size of our defense budget compared to 1910 i wonder how much of that spending is because we are the world power and how much is because a 20th century infrsstructure is even expensive in the 21st century? Social security since it is in the black the next 30 yrs sure cant be the reason can it?
Where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost.”
~Ronald Reagan
Let me point out a few basics... People in jobs pay tax, they also add to GDP as they have more to spend - and this leads to more jobs: a beneficial circle, thus the more people in jobs the better for all in general. However if the jobs they are employed in are Government jobs, ie they payed directly or indirectly by the Government then the Government makes a net loss... suppose you have Joe on a Government employment scheme earning X but doing nothing productive then the total tax he pays is only a percentage of X. It is cheaper not to have such employment programmes unless they are profitable. Furthermore who pays for the entire 'public sector'? The private businesses and the jobs they create! They are more tax beneficient than any Government job as they only pay tax and cost the Government nothing. Increasing the State job sector can ONLY work short term and so far until the private sector becomes unable to support it, then the lot collapses.
Your theory proposes that government jobs do not create anything. This is not necessarily the case, and entirely depends on the job the person does.
And it of course does not take nations into account who do the sensible thing and nationalize certain key industries to curb the influence of capitalists within their economy.
People who are working at productive jobs presumably create wealth regardless of who the employer is.
When one asks "who will pay for it?" as it regards government jobs one assumes that the only truly wealth producing jobs must be in the private sector.
Really it is putting the cart before the horse to think that way.
Wealth is the stuff that money buys not the other way around.
Money is merely a representation of wealth, not the wealth itself.
People who are working at productive jobs presumably create wealth regardless of who the employer is.
Give me an example of government creating wealth.
"We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008
I admittedly have a pretty narrow definition of generating wealth. It only includes the ~8% of the US population that work in manufacturing, plus farming, mining, timber, and other exploiting of natural resources.
Everything else lands into the "overhead" category in my book.
"We will go through our federal budget – page by page, line by line – eliminating those programs we don’t need, and insisting that those we do operate in a sensible cost-effective way." -President Barack Obama 11/25/2008
Military R&D,albeit indirectly and with a delay of several years or decades.
But,and that's the big ''but'',the military IS the most efficient organization known to man.But it's wholly unsuitable for the bulk of the society on the long run(which may be only as long as one generation).The food chain requires the sheeps outnumber both the wolves and the sheepdogs.
Those who know don't speak
He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36
space technologies being adapted for commercial use
medical discoveries by the CDC and NIH
the Internet
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov
space technologies being adapted for commercial use (national defense)
medical discoveries by the CDC and NIH
the Internet (national defense)
The government didn't set out to build the interstate, the internet, and space exploration for the benefit of mankind. They were part of the war effort against the Soviet Union. It was NOT the government that found an everyday use for these things.
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
Comment