• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would You accept putting $1 Trillion in increased revenues towards jobs?

Would You accept putting $1 Trillion in increased revenues towards jobs?

  • Total voters
    13
Harry Guerrilla said:
Both of our opinions are subjective,but I'm willing to bet yours is more subjective than mine.
Click to expand...

:ssst: your statement above is purely subjective.


Creating jobs to do busy work, doesn't provide a net benefit to anyone, except the job holder.
Click to expand...


There is plenty of redundancy and just plain busy work in corp America. As well as reward for abject failure.
 
winston53660 said:
There is plenty of redundancy and just plain busy work in corp America. As well as reward for abject failure.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, it has also been the government rewarding this failure as of late.
 
Henrin said:
I'm guessing you are paying for this $1 Trillion increase.

Anyway, public works projects are temporary and worthless for good growth.
Click to expand...

But, if they are done by the private sector it doesn't cost anything at all. For example the bridge in Detroit, U.S. to Canada. The private sector wants to build it. They already own the other Detroit to Canada one. But the government is screwing it all up. Just think how much money he could collect in tolls. And no price controls. Free enterprise.
 
Your Star said:
The government creates jobs, fact. End of thread.
Click to expand...

So we agree government doesnt have its own money.....it only has what it takes from the Private Sector--The Host Organism and Job Engine.

And if for instance you believe that the Obama PORKULUS boondoggle did create jobs.....at $278,000 per job.........thats $278,000 dollars removed from the private market and the Job Engine......

....it would be apparent you see the 1 Government job (Temporary work/postponed unemployment).....but fail to see the numerous private sector jobs that were destroyed in the process.
.
.
.
.
 
Objective Voice said:
Reagan increased the payroll tax in order to apply that revenue towards defense spending. By that, Reagan used public-private partnerships in order to empower the "military industrial complex" to create jobs and improve job growth.
Click to expand...
Reagan did many things which were intended to heal the economy, but that wasn't one of them. He did that for the sake of national security, at the expense of the economy. The fact that the economy improved so much is amazing, but it's even more amazing when you consider the fact that we were working on an even bigger problem at the same time, which made it twice as hard to fix the economy.
 
Your Star said:
The government creates jobs, fact. End of thread.
Click to expand...

Yes, the question is for how long? Take construction jobs, once done so is the job. Jobs created by the govt through stimulas are more likely to be short term. How does the private contractor keep the additional employees after the govt. dollars runs out and unless the economy picks up to support them with additial private dollars for more jobs. Have you seen that with the past stimulas dollars that were just spent?
 
Your Star said:
Government can create jobs that is just a fact. Anyone who denies this is out of their mind, and ignoring facts.
Click to expand...

Not on net, no they don't. If you destroy two and a half jobs to make one job, you haven't really "created jobs".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom