General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > The Pit
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
TheMorlock
Contrary to my previous title I never fucked Inf's mother
 
TheMorlock's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LegendKiller View Post
That's because the burden has been shifted more to the middle class as the upper classes have received more tax breaks. Had the shifting not been performed and the upper class tax brackets increased, revenues would have gone up.

I do not disagree about government pay levels. However, government pay is a fraction of the total government budget.

bzzzt wrong answer
__________________
There is nothing to worry about. Legions of wise people with nothing but all of best interests at heart are ensuring our future of love and infinite bliss. Go watch TV :Bflaps
http://www.genmay.com/showthread.php?t=572323
Old 11-19-2010, 05:31 PM TheMorlock is offline  
Reply With Quote
#106  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

Patriotic Eagle
 
Patriotic Eagle's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zangmonkey View Post
For one, government employment percentage has grown.
Almost all of which is at the state/local level and is dominated by security/law enforcement growth (i.e. apparatus to protect the capitalist state), with healthcare a distant second.

There has been a huge drive towards privatization in this country for the last few decades with many public utilities, prisons, and schools being privatized. The welfare state is constantly under threat of being dismantled, especially for those services not directly impacting white middle class Americans. The State at both the federal and local level is controlled almost entirely by capital, with massive public financing used to subsidize private exploitation.

The only thing that has grown is the ability of capital to control the State.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Zangmonkey View Post
Government has the uncanny ability to finance their employees' pensions, holidays, etc with money they don't have or that they intend to tax from private sector industry.
This is a laughable complaint in the face of the private sectors exploitation of labour. You're seriously more concerned with government employees having a decent standard of living/"safety net" than you are with the much greater and growing mass of workers who have neither.
Old 11-24-2010, 11:39 AM Patriotic Eagle is offline  
Reply With Quote
#107  

Patriotic Eagle
 
Patriotic Eagle's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by imzjustplayin View Post
That's . No private sector company can exercise power like the government can. What private company can just print money to get rid of its debt and NOT get arrested?
Large capitalist institutions have the government do it for them. Either way government debt has a far smaller effect on the welfare of the average person than private exploitation.
Old 11-24-2010, 11:44 AM Patriotic Eagle is offline  
Reply With Quote
#108  

Zangmonkey
3y3 4m t3h Gr4et gr4nD m0th4rfUxing mor4n! W4t<h //\y b33f kur+4nz F|4p!!# 4y4m 1e37!
 
Zangmonkey's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriotic Eagle View Post
Almost all of which is at the state/local level and is dominated by security/law enforcement growth (i.e. apparatus to protect the capitalist state), with healthcare a distant second.

I'll grant that given that I'm not motivated enough to research otherwise. Nonetheless, even those "public services" are bloated. In many cases, pensions and funds set up for law enforcement/fire/etc are non-existent ponzi schemes and follow a large salary. For example, starting firemen here make over $100,000 and have a lifetime pension fund. Policeman begin around $65k. The policemen have fought to keep their pension fund privatized because the state has plundered every other fund into bankruptcy. Nonetheless, each commands benefits which are the envy of private-sector workers.

Quote:
There has been a huge drive towards privatization in this country for the last few decades with many public utilities, prisons, and schools being privatized. The welfare state is constantly under threat of being dismantled, especially for those services not directly impacting white middle class Americans. The State at both the federal and local level is controlled almost entirely by capital, with massive public financing used to subsidize private exploitation.
...Privatization only in sense that it's supported by public funds and used as an excuse for deliberate waste. You know as well as I do that "preferred" "private" contractors grease the pockets of the lawmakers which grant them contracts and, if not, contracts are accepted on a basis of whichever is made simpler for the government (rather than any long-term sustainable idea). I have worked in government, and anybody else who has knowledge of their budgetary system understands that it cannot and must not be designed sustainably. If a private business wants to make a large purchase the save up, or cut somewhere else. This is impossible in most public-sector departments. If you do not spend every last dime of your allotment then whatever you "save" will likely be reduced from your budget next year or confiscated in part or whole to fund other underwater agencies. This is why we are constantly floating bonds, waiting for windfalls and raising tax requirements. Saving is *not feasible* in the public sector.

Quote:
The only thing that has grown is the ability of capital to control the State.
I wouldn't say that's the *only* thing but certainly anybody here, regardless of their affiliation, will agree that our "leaders" allowed public agencies to be run by lobbies, self-interest and the want for money and power.


Quote:
This is a laughable complaint in the face of the private sectors exploitation of labour. You're seriously more concerned with government employees having a decent standard of living/"safety net" than you are with the much greater and growing mass of workers who have neither.
Your definition of exploitation must differ from mine!
As for a safety net: I believe strongly in having one.... nonetheless it should be closely controlled and fundamentally designed to be undesirable. I believe it is *against* the interest of the people (and notably the poor!) to have a comprehensive welfare system. It deteriorates productivity, perceived self-worth and encourages dependency.
A comprehensive system is the reason we have habitual use of welfare. People feel stranded without it because they have come to depend on it.
Governments and wealthy private firms alike enjoy this because the more the population is dependent on them the more power and money they can derive.

Exploitation? You need look no further than the welfare system itself.
__________________
09 F9
Old 11-24-2010, 01:37 PM Zangmonkey is offline  
Reply With Quote
#109  

Patriotic Eagle
 
Patriotic Eagle's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zangmonkey View Post
I'll grant that given that I'm not motivated enough to research otherwise. Nonetheless, even those "public services" are bloated. In many cases, pensions and funds set up for law enforcement/fire/etc are non-existent ponzi schemes and follow a large salary. For example, starting firemen here make over $100,000 and have a lifetime pension fund. Policeman begin around $65k. The policemen have fought to keep their pension fund privatized because the state has plundered every other fund into bankruptcy. Nonetheless, each commands benefits which are the envy of private-sector workers.
Of course they're envious of people who can work and make a living wage and decent benefits. I have a hard time believing that fire fighter salary considering it's more than twice the average but whatever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zangmonkey View Post
...Privatization only in sense that it's supported by public funds and used as an excuse for deliberate waste. You know as well as I do that "preferred" "private" contractors grease the pockets of the lawmakers which grant them contracts and, if not, contracts are accepted on a basis of whichever is made simpler for the government (rather than any long-term sustainable idea). I have worked in government, and anybody else who has knowledge of their budgetary system understands that it cannot and must not be designed sustainably. If a private business wants to make a large purchase the save up, or cut somewhere else. This is impossible in most public-sector departments. If you do not spend every last dime of your allotment then whatever you "save" will likely be reduced from your budget next year or confiscated in part or whole to fund other underwater agencies. This is why we are constantly floating bonds, waiting for windfalls and raising tax requirements. Saving is *not feasible* in the public sector.
Where do you think the capital that private business "saves" comes from?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Zangmonkey View Post
Your definition of exploitation must differ from mine!
I'm sure it does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zangmonkey View Post
As for a safety net: I believe strongly in having one.... nonetheless it should be closely controlled and fundamentally designed to be undesirable. I believe it is *against* the interest of the people (and notably the poor!) to have a comprehensive welfare system. It deteriorates productivity, perceived self-worth and encourages dependency.A comprehensive system is the reason we have habitual use of welfare.
This is pure propaganda. The situation of the working class has only deteriorated with the disappearance of previously employment provided safety nets (via unions). This garbage about "self -worth" is designed to mollify feelings of guilt of an obviously unfair system.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Zangmonkey View Post
People feel stranded without it because they have come to depend on it.
Governments and wealthy private firms alike enjoy this because the more the population is dependent on them the more power and money they can derive.
Of course people are dependent on the controllers of capital?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zangmonkey View Post
Exploitation? You need look no further than the welfare system itself.
lmao
Old 01-04-2011, 06:03 PM Patriotic Eagle is offline  
Reply With Quote
#110  

pyramid
COORS LIGHTSPEED: ENGAGED
 
pyramid's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriotic Eagle View Post
This is a laughable complaint in the face of the private sectors exploitation of labour. You're seriously more concerned with government employees having a decent standard of living/"safety net" than you are with the much greater and growing mass of workers who have neither.

Everybody knows that all government workers are multimillionaires with massive golden parachutes...

__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monsters_Are_Due_on_Maple_Street
Old 01-04-2011, 06:19 PM pyramid is offline  
Reply With Quote
#111  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:52 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.