Big Government

[waldo]

ya BM, clearly... lukin will now distract from his own failed source (which he never had the wherewithal to actually identify) and bluster along his hyper-partisan progressive vs. regressive theme... you know, his boogeyman! (lukin, the WashPo article was the gravy, the FAIR treatment was the meat... wassup? Don't you like meat & gravy?... by the way, why has your American Debt Explained thread gone so silent? Is there a problem?)

[lukin]

ya BM, clearly... lukin will now distract from his own failed source (which he never had the wherewithal to actually identify) and bluster along his hyper-partisan progressive vs. regressive theme... you know, his boogeyman! (lukin, the WashPo article was the gravy, the FAIR treatment was the meat... wassup? Don't you like meat & gravy?... by the way, why has your American Debt Explained thread gone so silent? Is there a problem?)

Little man is getting defensive. You have no clue, little man. Get some fresh air little man. The public sector is growing, while contributing nothing to the economy. Please don't tell on me little man, and get me banned again little man. You do need to try to understand, little man.

[BubberMiley]

Little man is getting defensive.

I guess when you're caught posting misleading data on debt loads, the only thing you can do is run away and call people names while doing so.

Edited September 24, 2011 by BubberMiley

[lukin]

I guess when you're caught posting misleading data on debt loads, the only thing you can do is run away and call people names while doing so.

There was absolutely nothing misleading. Please post what was misleading, without relying on your hero to do it for you.

[Pliny]

You can get a good salary and pension, sure, solidly "middle class", often for jobs that might get paid a lot less in the private sector, but you certainly aren't going to get "rich" working a government job.

Perhaps why they moonlight. Quite a few have time for businesses on the side.

Nevertheless, it is increasingly hard to make a living in the private sector and more comfortable economically in the public sector.

Besides $60K in Canada is considered rich. 50K for me would be great.

Edited September 25, 2011 by Pliny

[BubberMiley]

There was absolutely nothing misleading. Please post what was misleading, without relying on your hero to do it for you.

My hero clearly showed how you tried to make it seem that Obama generated the debt he inherited from Bush. Isn't that why you're scared to revisit the thread and are stalking my hero in other threads and calling him names?

[lukin]

My hero clearly showed how you tried to make it seem that Obama generated the debt he inherited from Bush. Isn't that why you're scared to revisit the thread and are stalking my hero in other threads and calling him names?

Actually tmiley, the hermit follows me. The debt is increasing at an all-time high under Obama. that is a fact. Bush had 8 years, Obama has had just over 3. I'm not defending Bush, it's a fact, though, that Obama is increasing the debt to proportions that can't possibly be paid.

[Pliny]

more lukinFacts, hey? Since you can't be bothered to actually source your "facts", let me assist. Your numbers/comment (sans parasitic vitriol) reflects upon this USA Today story - Author Dennis Cauchon... which doesn't seem to jive with this Washington Post story - Federal salaries fall behind private sector

but wait, it gets better, much better: it seems the USA Today and in particular that same author Dennis Cauchon has a history, a pattern... one that FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting) details quite succinctly: USA Today Targets Government Workers - Campaigning to cut their pay using bogus statistics. say what? Bogus statistics... er, lukinFacts!

The O'keefe article jives with the Cauchon article since it is just a "they said ...we said" piece that reflects different interpretations of statistics. Why aren't you quoting the scientists here, waldo and depending upon reporters? Where's your in depth analysis that skips past the partisanship?

As we see it is hard to get a clear picture of differences in payscales between private and public sector jobs mostly due to the vested interests that try to skew the numbers. Statistics are unreliable when interpreted by those special interests who have nothing to lose and everyting to gain.

One has to look at the the partisan interests of those providing the analysis. What benefit does Couchon get from his side of the argument and what benefit does O'Keefe get? Cauchon gets to look like a protector of the public purse and O'keefe gets to be a hero to the public employee.

I will say Okeefe's article is a bit weak since he admits to the issue being contentious without claiming outright victory.

The fact is that all employees cannot be used to make the comparison as there are many more private sector jobs that pay lower and skew those numbers down. Comparison on a job to job basis, equal work, would I'm sure settle that the public sector is getting a far better deal than the private sector.

The main point we have to keep in mind is that the private sector pays the salary of both private and public employees. Public employees should be more respectful and grateful to the private sector than they are but for some reason they like to spit on them by calling them greedy, claiming entitlements as rights, and if they try and make any corrections they are right wing extremists.

[Pliny]

delete -Double post.

Edited September 25, 2011 by Pliny

[Pliny]

And to be precise, the quote was this: "majority of the citizens...Canada ... have come to rely on big government for survival"

Unless you are willing to equate employment and survival, which is absurd.

By using the word "survival" I suppose they would have to find something else to rely upon for their survival if government weren't there.

Perhaps we should say "majority of the citizens...Canada...have come to rely on big government for their "standard of living" - something that if it were compromised would be the end of life as they know it.

Your citation from statscan only shows the percentage of those in the work force that are employees in the private and public service. There is approximately 1 public employee to 6 private employees including all levels of government, federal, provincial and municipal.

This does not include private companies contracted to government, welfare recipients, doctors (considered private businesses along with their staff), all the corporations relying on subsidies and bailouts, all the retired public employees collecting pensions paid for out of that private sector money.

The fact of the matter is that approximately 48 cents out of every dollar in the economy goes to taxes.

That's pretty damn close to the majority. Does it all go to wages... no...but the public sector depends upon it for it's continued exsitence and to a degree some of the private sector.

Special interests, regulations, dependencies... pfft. MLW is full of abandoned and dead threads on the subject of alternatives and this appears to be headed in that direction, more so since it is premised on something that simply is not true.

All things, not out of the left-wing socialist hand book is premised upon things that are simply not true, so it seems!

Edited September 25, 2011 by Pliny

[Pliny]

And just to continue...

The public sector thrives on 48% of the private sector economy, that leaves 52% to keep the economy going as well as pay itself.

So Do I think it is the majority of people in Canada that rely on big government for their survival..in light of the above why wouldn't I?

[Black Dog]

The fact of the matter is that approximately 48 cents out of every dollar in the economy goes to taxes.

That's pretty damn close to the majority. Does it all go to wages... no...but the public sector depends upon it for it's continued exsitence and to a degree some of the private sector.

<snip>

The public sector thrives on 48% of the private sector economy, that leaves 52% to keep the economy going as well as pay itself.

So Do I think it is the majority of people in Canada that rely on big government for their survival..in light of the above why wouldn't I?

That's just bull. Do public sector employees not pay their own taxes? Do they not contribute to the private sector through their purchasing choices? The relationship is far more symbiotic than parasitical.

[Black Dog]

The fact of the matter is that approximately 48 cents out of every dollar in the economy goes to taxes.

That's pretty damn close to the majority. Does it all go to wages... no...but the public sector depends upon it for it's continued exsitence and to a degree some of the private sector.

<snip>

The public sector thrives on 48% of the private sector economy, that leaves 52% to keep the economy going as well as pay itself.

So Do I think it is the majority of people in Canada that rely on big government for their survival..in light of the above why wouldn't I?

That's just bull. Do public sector employees not pay their own taxes? Do they not contribute to the private sector through their purchasing choices? The relationship is far more symbiotic than parasitical.

[Pliny]

That's just bull. Do public sector employees not pay their own taxes?

That's a point. Not all of the 48% of taxes that citizens pay comes out of the economy directly. Some of it has already been redistributed and is on it's second cycle. It's just taking it out of one pocket and putting it in another.

Do they not contribute to the private sector through their purchasing choices?

It's similar to taking some of your profits and buying some of your production with it and saying your profits are now greater.

The relationship is far more symbiotic than parasitical.

A government that has no wealth of it's own is in a symbiotic relationship with wealth creators????

It is given a role to protect the person and property of it's citizens and is charged with applying the law equally to all. The governments of our social democracies have taken on powers to apply the law to make all equal.

[Black Dog]

That's a point. Not all of the 48% of taxes that citizens pay comes out of the economy directly. Some of it has already been redistributed and is on it's second cycle. It's just taking it out of one pocket and putting it in another.

Yeah, that's called capitalism.

It's similar to taking some of your profits and buying some of your production with it and saying your profits are now greater.

If a business pays taxes and those taxes are used to pay a public sector employee who then turns around and spends his money with the business...well, that's just the cycle of capital.

A government that has no wealth of it's own is in a symbiotic relationship with wealth creators????

Ah the old myth of the welath creators, spinning gold from thin air.

It is given a role to protect the person and property of it's citizens and is charged with applying the law equally to all. The governments of our social democracies have taken on powers to apply the law to make all equal.

Sloganeering.

[Pliny]

Yeah, that's called capitalism.

Then you need to review the definition of capitalism.

If a business pays taxes and those taxes are used to pay a public sector employee who then turns around and spends his money with the business...well, that's just the cycle of capital.

Only under a zero sum concept.

Let's say someone robbed a store of it's profits. Then he went and bought some of the store's products.

Is the store better off?

Ah the old myth of the welath creators, spinning gold from thin air.

I suppose it is easier to see it rolling off the printing press.

Sloganeering.

But great sloganeering.